asis workplace violence guidelines book

87619ASFIS-WorkplaceViol-R6.fh9 11/2/05 7:23 AM Page 3

C i

1625 Prince Street

Alexandria, VA 22314-2818 USA

703-519-6200

Fax: 703-519-6299

www.asisonline.org

WorkplaceViolencePreventionandResponse

87619ASFIS-WorkplaceViol-R5.fh9 10/28/05 2:52 PM Page 1

Composite

ASIS INTERNATIONALCOMMISSION ON GUIDELINES

The Commission on Guidelines was established in early 2001 by ASIS

International (ASIS) in response to a concerted need for guidelines

regarding security issues in the United States. As the preeminent

organization for security professionals worldwide, ASIS has an

important role to play in helping the private sector secure its business

and critical infrastructure, whether from natural disaster, accidents,

or planned actions, such as terrorist attacks, vandalism, etc. ASIS

had previously chosen not to promulgate guidelines and standards,

but world events have brought to the forefront the need for a

professional security organization to spearhead an initiative to create

security advisory provisions. By addressing specific concerns and

issues inherent to the security industry, security guidelines will better

serve the needs of security professionals by increasing the

effectiveness and productivity of security practices and solutions, as

well as enhancing the professionalism of the industry.

Mission Statement

To advance the practice of security through the development of

guidelines within a voluntary, non-proprietary, and consensus-based

process utilizing to the fullest extent possible the knowledge,

experience, and expertise of ASIS membership and the security

industry.

Goals and Objectives

• Assemble and categorize a database of existing security-related

guidelines

• Develop methodology for identifying new guideline development

projects

• Involve ASIS Councils, interested members, and other

participants to support guideline development

• Identify and establish methodology for development,

documentation, and acceptance of guidelines

• Build and sustain alliances with related organizations to

benchmark, participate in, and support ASIS guideline

development

• Produce national consensus-based guidelines in cooperation

with other industries and the Security Industry Standards Council

Functions

• Establish guideline projects

• Determine guidelines for development and assign scope

• Assign participating Council(s), where appropriate

• Approve membership on guideline committees

• Act as a governing body to manage and integrate guidelines

from various Councils and security disciplines

• Review and monitor projects and guideline development

• Approve Final Draft Guideline and Final Guideline

• Select guidelines for submission to the Security Industry

Standards Council and the American National Standards Institute

(ANSI)

Workplace Violence Prevention and Response Guideline

WORKPLACE VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

GUIDELINE

SAFETY Act Designation In April 2005, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) awarded ASIS International a Designation for its Guidelines Program under the SAFETY Act (Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective Technology Act of 2002). This Designation is significant in three ways: (1) it establishes that ASIS guidelines are qualified to be a “technology” that could reduce the risks or effects of terrorism, (2) it limits ASIS’ liability for acts arising out of the use of the guidelines in connection with an act of terrorism, and (3) it precludes claims of third party damages against organizations using the guidelines as a means to prevent or limit the scope of terrorist acts.

ASIS GDL WPV 09 2005


Copyright © 2005 by ASIS International ISBN 1-887056-63-7 ASIS International (ASIS) disclaims liability for any personal injury, property, or other damages of any nature whatsoever, whether special, indirect, consequential, or compensatory, directly or indirectly resulting from the publication, use of, or reliance on this document. In issuing and making this document available, ASIS is not undertaking to render professional or other services for or on behalf of any person or entity. Nor is ASIS undertaking to perform any duty owed by any person or entity to someone else. Anyone using this document should rely on his or her own independent judgment or, as appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstance. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to individual users to download this document for their own personal use, with acknowledgment of ASIS International as the source. However, this document may not be downloaded for further copying or reproduction nor may it be sold, offered for sale, or otherwise used commercially. Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

ASIS GDL WPV 09 2005


TM

Workplace Violence Prevention andResponse Guideline

1.0 Title ...................................................................................................................................... 52.0 Revision History ................................................................................................................. 53.0 Commission Members ...................................................................................................... 54.0 Committee Members ......................................................................................................... 55.0 Guidelines Designation ..................................................................................................... 66.0 Scope ................................................................................................................................... 67.0 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 68.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 69.0 Key Words ........................................................................................................................... 7

10.0 Terminology ........................................................................................................................ 711.0 Workplace Violence – A Broad Concern for Employers ............................................... 8

11.1 Defining Workplace Violence ................................................................................. 811.2 Workplace Violence Typology ................................................................................. 911.3 Measuring Workplace Violence ............................................................................... 1011.4 Awareness and Action .............................................................................................. 1111.5 Workplace Violence and the Law ........................................................................... 12

12.0 The Need for a Multidisciplinary Approach ................................................................... 1312.1 Key Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 1312.2 Other Important Stakeholders ................................................................................. 15

13.0 Preparedness and Prevention ........................................................................................... 1713.1 A Needs Assessment Offers a Good First Step ...................................................... 1713.2 Managers and Employees Should Have a Basic Awareness of

Warning Signs that Can Point to Potential Violence ........................................... 1813.3 Organizations Benefit from a Formal Workplace Violence Prevention

and Response Program ............................................................................................ 1913.4 Organizations Should Develop Strategies for Successful Program

Implementation ......................................................................................................... 2314.0 Threat Response and Incident Management ................................................................. 25

14.1 Initial Notification .................................................................................................... 2814.2 Initial Data Gathering and Preliminary Risk Screening ....................................... 2814.3 Initial Actions by Threat Management Team ....................................................... 3014.4 Threat Response Actions Coordinated by the Threat Management Team ....... 3014.5 Concluding an Incident ........................................................................................... 3114.6 Monitoring ................................................................................................................. 3114.7 Responding to a Violent Incident in the Workplace ............................................ 31

A : 87619$$CH111-01-05 11:09:48 Page 3Layout: 87619 : odd

ASIS GDL WPV 09 2005 3


15.0 Integrating the Issue of Domestic Violence into Workplace ViolencePrevention Strategies ......................................................................................................... 3215.1 Commitment .............................................................................................................. 3315.2 Multidisciplinary Approach ..................................................................................... 3315.3 Recognition ................................................................................................................ 3315.4 Prevention .................................................................................................................. 3415.5 Legal Issues ................................................................................................................ 3415.6 Detection, Investigation, and Risk Assessment ..................................................... 3515.7 Privacy Issues ............................................................................................................ 3615.8 Safety/Security Measures ......................................................................................... 3615.9 When Employees are Abusers ................................................................................. 3715.10 Documentation ....................................................................................................... 3715.11 Referrals .................................................................................................................... 37

16.0 The Role of Law Enforcement .......................................................................................... 3817.0 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 4018.0 References/Bibliography ................................................................................................... 41

A : 87619$$CH111-01-05 11:09:48 Page 4Layout: 87619 : even

4 ASIS GDL WPV 09 2005


1.0 TITLE

The title of this document is Workplace Violence Prevention and Response Guideline.

2.0 REVISION HISTORY

Baseline Document.

3.0 COMMISSION MEMBERS

Regis W. Becker, CPP, PPG Industries, ChairMark Geraci, CPP, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Vice ChairEdward G. Casey, CPP, Procter & Gamble CompanyMichael A. Crane, CPP, IPC International CorporationRobert W. Jones, Praxair, Inc.Michael E. Knoke, CPP, Kelly Services, Inc.Daniel H. Kropp, CPP, D. H. Kropp & Associates, LLCPaul E. Zikmund, Tyco International (US) Inc.

4.0 COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Rebecca A. Speer, Esq., Speer Associates/Workplace Counsel, Co-ChairThomas Frank, CPP, Abbott Laboratories, Co-ChairJames S. Cawood, CPP, PCI, PSP, Factor OneJoanne T. Colucci, CPP, American ExpressMichael A. Crane, CPP, IPC International CorporationStephen Doherty, Center for Technology Commercialization, Inc.Fredrick A. Foster, CPP, Seventrees Corp.Terri Howard, Target Corp.E. Lynn Jenkins, National Institute for Occupational Safety and HealthDaniel B. Kennedy, Ph.D., CPP, University of Detroit MercyJames Knoll, M.D., Dartmouth Medical SchoolDonald Knox, CPP, State Farm InsuranceMark A. Lies, II, Esq., Seyfarth Shaw LLPRick Maltz, U.S. FoodserviceScott McArthur, CPP, Microsoft Corp.Stephen R. Morrow, CPP, JPMorgan ChaseW. Barry Nixon, SPHR, National Institute for the Prevention of Workplace Violence, Inc.Pamela Paziotopoulos, Esq., The Paziotopoulos GroupFrank E. Rudewicz, Esq., CPP, UHY Advisors FLVS, Inc.Eugene A. Rugala, FBI/National Center for the Analysis of Violent CrimeTeresa P. Scalzo, Esq., National Center for the Prosecution of Violence Against WomenRonald Schouten, M.D., J.D., Harvard Medical SchoolDenise L. Stoneburner, CPP, ConocoPhillipsKim Wells, Corporate Alliance to End Partner ViolenceStephen G. White, Ph.D., Work Trauma Services, Inc./University of California, SF




5.0 GUIDELINES DESIGNATION

This guideline is designated as ASIS GDL WPV 09 2005.

6.0 SCOPE

The Workplace Violence Prevention and Response Guideline applies to both private andpublic sector organizations. The guideline provides an overview of general policies,structures, and practices that organizations can adopt to: (i) help prevent threateningmisconduct and violence affecting the workplace; and (ii) better respond to and resolveincidents of threats and violence that occur.

7.0 SUMMARY

This guideline presents practical definitions of workplace violence and the continuum ofacts and behavior, from less severe to more severe, and a classification of workplaceviolence incidents based on the relationship of perpetrator to victim. It outlines preventionstrategies and procedures for detecting, investigating, managing, and following up onthreats or violent incidents that occur in a workplace. The guideline covers the followingtopics: (a) Workplace Violence—A Broad Concern for Employers; (b) the Need for aMultidisciplinary Response; (c) Preparedness and Prevention; (d) Threat Response andIncident Management; (e) Integrating the Issue of Domestic Violence into WorkplaceViolence Prevention Strategies; and (f) the Role of Law Enforcement. The guideline containsa focus on workplace violence Types II through IV, as defined in Section 11.2 below.Additional workplace violence prevention resources are listed in Section 18.0, References/Bibliography.

8.0 PURPOSE

While there is no precise measure of the full extent and cost of violence in the workplace, itclearly represents a major challenge, affecting an estimated 1.7 million1 employees directlyand millions more indirectly every year. Similarly, the benefit of improved violenceprevention measures in the workplace cannot be calculated with precision, since there isno way to count or measure the cost of incidents that have been prevented. As a generalrule, however, it is beyond reasonable dispute that the costs associated with prevention willbe lower than the costs that violence exacts in the form of lost production and earnings,disrupted business activity, damaged morale, and medical and legal expenses. A violent actin the workplace affects more than just the person or persons who are directly threatenedor harmed. It affects the entire workforce, damaging the sense of community and trust andemployees’ confidence that they will be safe while doing their jobs. In this sense, everyonein the organization is harmed when violence occurs, and, correspondingly, everyone sharesin the benefits when violence is prevented. Everyone carries, too, the obligation to keep theworkplace safe and violence-free. The key to an effective anti-violence strategy is anintegrated approach, drawing on skills and capabilities from all parts of an organization’sstructure. This guideline is intended to serve as an educational and practical tool that

1 Violence in the Workplace, 1993-1999. Special Report, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of JusticeStatistics. Washington, DC: December 2001, NCJ 190076.




organizations can use as a resource in developing policies, structures, and practices thatwill help prevent and manage the range of inappropriate behaviors that fall within therubric of workplace violence.

9.0 KEY WORDS

Incident Management, Incident Management Team, Threat, Violence Risk Assessment,Workplace Violence, Workplace Violence Program, Workplace Violence Typology.

10.0 TERMINOLOGY

The following words or terms are defined below, as they will be used throughout thisguideline.

Case Management: See Incident Management below.

Incident Management: Also termed ‘‘Case Management.’’ Incident Management refers tothe processes, strategies, and methods followed by a Threat Management Team to(a) receive reports of behaviors requiring assessment, (b) assess the cases, (c) develop andimplement an intervention strategy, and (d) monitor the case until final resolution isachieved.

Incident Management Team: See Threat Management Team below.

Threat: A Threat refers to any verbal or physical behavior or communication thatreasonably could be interpreted as communicating or conveying intent to cause physicalharm to a person or property.

Threat Assessment: See Violence Risk Assessment below.

Threat Management Team: Also termed an Incident Management Team. A ThreatManagement Team refers to the personnel designated within an organization to receive,respond to, and resolve reported situations made under an organization’s workplaceviolence program.

Violence Risk Assessment: Also termed a ‘‘Threat Assessment.’’ A Violence Risk Assessmentrefers to the investigative and analytical process followed by a specifically qualifiedprofessional to determine the nature of the threat and level of risk of violence presented byan individual and the steps to be taken to mitigate the risk.

Workplace Violence: As further defined and discussed in Section 11 below, WorkplaceViolence refers to a broad range of behaviors falling along a spectrum that, due to theirnature and/or severity, significantly affect the workplace, generate a concern for personalsafety, or result in physical injury or death.

Workplace Violence Program: A Workplace Violence Program refers to a collection ofpolicies, structures, and practices adopted by an organization to help prevent workplaceviolence and to assist the organization in effectively managing reported incidents ofworkplace violence or threats.

Workplace Violence Typology: As described in Section 11 below, U.S. occupational healthand safety agencies have developed a workplace violence classification system, or




Workplace Violence Typology, that categorizes workplace violence incidents according tothe relationship of perpetrator to victim.

11.0. WORKPLACE VIOLENCE—A BROAD CONCERN FOR EMPLOYERS

The term ‘‘workplace violence’’ most often conjures up frightening images of disgruntled orderanged workers who unleash deadly shooting sprees harming multiple victims—the kindof events that periodically appear in newspaper headlines and national TV news reports.Such headlines may have helped create a national awareness of workplace violence. But byfocusing on one of its rarest forms – multiple homicides by former or current employees –media accounts may also have obscured the true breadth and magnitude of this costly andwidespread problem.

Workplace homicides are committed by non-employees much more often than bycoworkers, and other forms of workplace violence are vastly more common than homicide.For the great majority of employers, dealing with workplace violence means tacklingaggressive harassment, threats, non-fatal assaults, and other conduct that raises a concernfor the safety of people or property. These events make no headlines but are the crux of theworkplace violence problem – a significant and broad problem that crosses industry linesand affects large and small employers alike.

11.1. Defining Workplace Violence

Any definition of workplace violence must be broad enough to encompass the full range ofbehaviors that can cause injury, damage property, impede the normal course of work, ormake workers, managers, and customers fear for their safety. For purposes of this guideline,workplace violence is defined as follows:

Workplace violence refers to a broad range of behaviors falling along a spectrum that, dueto their nature and/or severity, significantly affect the workplace, generate a concern forpersonal safety, or result in physical injury or death.

At the low end of the workplace violence spectrum lie disruptive, aggressive, hostile, oremotionally abusive behaviors that generate anxiety or create a climate of distrust, and thatadversely affect productivity and morale. These behaviors of concern could – but will notnecessarily – escalate into more severe behavior falling further along the workplace violencespectrum; however, independent of the question of possible escalation, these behaviors arein themselves harmful and for that reason alone warrant attention and effectiveintervention.

Further along the spectrum are words or other actions that are reasonably perceived to beintimidating, frightening, or threatening to employees and that generate a justifiableconcern for personal safety. These behaviors include, among others, direct, conditional orveiled threats, stalking, and aggressive harassment.

At the high end of the spectrum are acts of overt violence causing physical injury. Theseacts include non-fatal physical assaults with or without weapons – including pushing,shoving, hitting, kicking, or biting – and, in the worst cases, lethal violence inflicted byshooting, stabbing, bombing or any other deadly means.




In addition to acts that frighten or harm others, workplace violence includes threats ordamage to company property and words or actions indicating that an employee mightharm him or herself at the workplace.

Where threatening or violent behavior is motivated by a characteristic that is legallyprotected against discrimination (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, religion, and so forth),workplace violence includes conduct that can generate a ‘‘hostile work environment’’ aslegally defined under prevailing discrimination and harassment laws.

FIGURE 1. THE WORKPLACE VIOLENCE SPECTRUM

Behaviors Threatening Physical Injury Death

of Concern Behavior

11.2. Workplace Violence Typology

U.S. occupational health and safety agencies have developed a classification system thatcategorizes workplace violence incidents according to the relationship of perpetrator tovictim. This typology can prove helpful to those seeking to better understand the issue andto develop prevention and response strategies appropriate for different forms of workplaceviolence.

Type I—Criminal acts. Type I incidents are those in which a perpetrator has no relationshipto the business and commits a violent act at a worksite in the course of committinganother crime. For instance, a homicide or assault occurring in the course of a robbery is aform of Type I workplace violence.

Terrorist attacks directed at workplaces can be viewed as a sub-category of Type I violence.

Type II—Customer/client/patient violence. Type II incidents are those in which theperpetrator is not an employee but has a relationship with the business as a customer,client, or patient, and becomes violent while receiving services or for reasons engenderedby the business relationship. For instance, when a psychiatric patient assaults a physician,or a disgruntled client or customer threatens a company or one of its employees, thoseincidents are classified as Type II.

Type III—Worker-on-worker violence. Type III incidents stem from an employmentrelationship: they include incidents in which a current or former employee (or independentcontractor) harms or threatens to harm another employee.

Type IV—Violence stemming from a personal relationship. Type IV incidents are those thatoccur in the workplace but arise from a personal, or intimate, relationship between theperpetrator and victim. If someone is harassed, threatened, or harmed at his or her place ofwork by an abusive partner, that is a Type IV incident. Type IV incidents may occur in




instances where either the abused partner, the abuser, or both are employed at theworkplace in question.

11.3. Measuring Workplace Violence

Studies on workplace violence reveal the seriousness and extent of the problem:

Homicides occur most frequently in industries at highest risk for Type I violence buthappen elsewhere as well. The U.S. Department of Labor report entitled National Census ofFatal Occupational Injuries states that 631 homicides occurred in workplaces in 2003, thethird leading cause of job-related injury deaths.2 Of the 631 reported homicides, 480—or 76percent—fell into the Type I workplace violence category, occurring during the course of arobbery or other crime. Research has identified retail trade, taxicab and transportation, andlaw enforcement and security industries as ‘‘high risk’’ workplaces for Type I incidents.

Of the other homicides that were reported in 2003, 30—or 5 percent—were in the Type IIcategory, in which the killing was committed by a customer, client, or patient; 80—or 13percent—were Type III violence, in which one worker killed another; and 37—or 6percent—represented Type IV violence perpetrated by a personal acquaintance (mostcommonly a current or former husband or boyfriend). Information was not available on theclassification of the four remaining killings.

Non-fatal incidents form the crux of the workplace violence problem. Homicides are theexception, not the rule, in workplace violence. By far, the larger part of the problemconsists of threats and violence that result in non-fatal injuries or endangers workers orcustomers in a workplace. Because such incidents are often not reported, no finite statisticsexist as to the number of workers who annually experience non-fatal assaults, verbalthreats, harassment, stalking, and other conduct generating fear for personal safety.However, a variety of studies confirm that workplace violence affects a large number ofAmericans. A study conducted by the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statisticsfrom 1993 to 1999, found that each year an estimated 1.7 million workers fell victim to non-fatal violent crime – simple or aggravated assault, robbery, and rape or sexual assault –while at work or on duty. The vast majority of these incidents—95 percent—involvedsimple assaults. The highest rates of violence occurred in law enforcement, retail sales, andhealth care settings.

Other data emerging from private studies show that employers perceive violence as asignificant problem. In six of the last seven years, Fortune 1000 companies responding toan annual survey conducted by the Pinkerton security company cited workplace violence asthe number one security threat facing companies. When the Society for Human ResourcesManagement conducted a survey examining violent incidents and violence preventionactivities over a three and a half year period ending in June 2003, two-thirds of the 270

2 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, 2003. USDL Pub. No.04-1830. September 22, 2004. Additional statistical information in this section is taken from the following sources: Duhart,Detis. Violence in the Workplace, 1993-99. NCJ 190076. December 2001; Pinkerton. Top Security Threats and ManagementIssues Facing Corporate America: 2003 Survey of Fortune 1000 Companies. PCI 8473. March 2003; Society for Human ResourcesManagement.Workplace Violence Survey, 2004; Hartley, Daniel, Biddle, Elyce A., and E. Lynn Jenkins. ‘‘Societal Cost ofWorkplace Homicides in the United States, 1992-2001.’’ American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2005.




human resources professionals who responded to that survey reported that theirorganizations had experienced some form of workplace violence (defined very broadlywithin the survey) during that period. Most commonly, incidents involved inappropriatelanguage, verbal abuse, and verbal threats of violence. The survey data indicated that largerorganizations tended to experience a higher rate of incidents than small organizations.

Studies confirm the high cost of workplace violence. Other research has attempted invarious ways to determine the cost of workplace violence. Using a model that calculatesdirect and indirect costs of workplace fatalities, including medical expenses and lostearnings, researchers from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health(NIOSH) estimated the average mean cost of a workplace homicide incident, from 1992 to2001, to be $800,000. The total cost of workplace homicides during this same time periodtotaled nearly $6.5 billion. Studies have yet to capture the full cost of workplace violence inits many forms.

More measurement is needed. Our knowledge of the scale of workplace violence remainsincomplete, without a consistent system of data collection or standardized or uniformdefinitions. Data regarding the less severe forms of workplace violence are particularlysparse. Data are also weak with respect to the economic and human costs of workplaceviolence and the effectiveness of known intervention strategies.3

11.4. Awareness and Action

Despite gaps, existing data pertaining to workplace violence have been sufficient to create awidespread awareness of the problem and its consequences. In response, governmental andprivate organizations in the U.S. and abroad have embarked on important initiatives andproduced relatively extensive literature regarding risk factors, violence prevention andincident management strategies, the prevention needs of specific occupational groups, andother issues associated with workplace violence. For example, the U.S. Occupational Safetyand Health Administration (OSHA) has published guidelines and recommendations forprotecting employees in occupations that experience a high risk of Type I and Type IIviolence, such as health care workers, late-night retail employees, and taxi drivers. Somestates have followed suit.4

In 1993, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) convened an Interagency WorkingGroup of experts from a variety of professions and federal agencies to develop workplaceviolence guidelines. In 1998, OPM published the document, Dealing with WorkplaceViolence: A Guide for Agency Planners, which established a methodology for developingworkplace violence programs within federal agencies. In 2003, the National Center for theAnalysis of Violent Crime of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) published WorkplaceViolence: Issues in Response, a monograph covering issues of prevention, intervention,violence risk assessment and management, as well as crisis management and criticalincident response.

3 See Workplace Violence: A Report to the Nation. University of Iowa Injury Prevention Research Center. Iowa City, Iowa:February 2001.

4 See Speer, R. Workplace Violence: A Legal Perspective. Clinics in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 3:733-749 (2003).




11.5. Workplace Violence and the Law

Workplace violence has emerged as a focus of attention in legal circles as well. Legal issuesassociated with workplace violence can be divided into two broad categories. The firstarises from the legal responsibility of an employer to safeguard against preventable harm toemployees, customers, and anyone else visiting a workplace: in other words, the duty toprevent violence. The second has to do with an employer’s obligation to respect employeerights during any investigative or disciplinary process stemming from an incident involvingworkplace violence or a threat of violence: that is, the duty to appropriately manageincidents or threats that have occurred.

The latter category is discussed in Section 12 below. In terms of the first category, there isno specific law that spells out an employer’s duty to prevent workplace violence. Instead,an employer’s duty to prevent workplace violence emerges from occupational health andsafety statutes at the federal and state level, and from judicial decisions (common lawprecedents) emerging from cases litigated nationwide. Collectively, these create a basicobligation by an employer to take responsible steps to safeguard a workplace from violence.

Under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act and corresponding state statutes,each employer owes a ‘‘general duty’’ to protect employees against ‘‘recognized hazards’’that are likely to cause serious injury or death. Workplace violence has been identified asone of those hazards, and both federal and state OSHA agencies have issued citations toemployers under the Act’s general duty clause for failure to protect employees againstworkplace violence.

An employer’s obligation to maintain a safe place to work also arises from the legalprinciples that exist in most states under common law. Legal principles most commonlydiscussed in litigated cases involving workplace violence include:

● Premises liability (the duty of a property owner to take responsible steps to guardagainst reasonably foreseeable violence)

● Respondeat superior (an employer’s indirect liability for the wrongful acts of anemployee committed within the course and scope of employment);

● Sexual and other forms of harassment prohibited under discrimination laws (whenthreats or violence are motivated by a victim’s protected status); and

● A collection of negligence theories, including negligent hiring (the failure toproperly screen job applicants, particularly for sensitive positions involving a highdegree of interaction with the public); negligent supervision (the failure tosupervise employees and to discipline violators of anti-violence rules); andnegligent retention (the failure to terminate employees who have engaged inbehavior in violation of company policies).5

The abundance of activity around the issue makes clear that workplace violence is animportant concern for American employers. It also tells employers that if they wish to take

5 See Speer (2003).




steps to protect their employees, customers, and property from violence, they need notreinvent the wheel but can draw on knowledge and experience that is already available.

One lesson that emerges from the work already done in the field is that workplace violencecannot be the exclusive concern of any single division or constituency in an organization,or the community in which the organization operates. An effective response will require amultidisciplinary approach involving the attention and efforts of multiple stakeholders.

12.0. THE NEED FOR A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH

Responsibility for workplace violence prevention and response does not fall neatly into anyone segment of an employer’s organizational chart. It is not exclusively a security issue, ahuman resources issue, an employment law issue, a behavioral issue, or a managementissue, but instead touches on each of these disciplines. Consequently, determining who inan organization will be responsible for dealing with the many aspects of workplace violenceis not a simple matter. The most effective response requires a multidisciplinary approach,drawing on different parts of the management structure, with different tasks, perspectives,areas of knowledge, and skills.

Accordingly, the first steps in developing a workplace violence prevention and responsestrategy involve identifying the personnel who will carry primary responsibility forpreventing and responding to incidents of violence, providing them with necessaryresources and training, and creating policies and procedures that will enable them to workas a coordinated team rather than separately.

12.1. Key Stakeholders

In many organizations, the major responsibility for addressing workplace violence issueswill fall on security, human resources, and legal personnel. The roles of these three groupswill reflect the different resources and capabilities they bring to the problem:

Security. Security personnel will typically be the first contacted about a violent incident ora threat of violence. In larger organizations, providing a safe workplace may be the functionof a security manager or an entire department that has no other responsibilities outside thesecurity field. In smaller organizations, security responsibilities may fall on the owner orother members of management.

Security professionals are likely to constitute the best source of practical expertise on suchtopics as on-site physical security; appropriate incident management techniques, includinginitial risk screening; background investigations; and law enforcement intervention andcoordination. Prior to any incident, security personnel often become critical in assisting anorganization in developing an overall workplace violence program and in carrying outcertain components of the program, such as implementing physical security, conductingemployee background screenings, and assisting in investigations of potentially violentsituations.

Security personnel will become instrumental during an incident, as well, as they maybecome involved in controlling and securing the worksite during a violent incident. Security




personnel may also become involved in defusing and containing threatening situationsuntil police can reach the scene.

Finally, security personnel can provide valuable assistance to law enforcement officers whorespond to a threat or violent incident. Frequently, security personnel will have establishedrelationships with local police agencies, which can help expedite police response to anincident.

Human Resources. Human resources personnel play a central role in an organization’sviolence prevention and response strategies as part of their broader responsibilities in thearea of employee relations. In many companies, human resources will occupy a leadershiprole in developing the workplace violence prevention and response program and relevantpolicies, practices, and procedures, organizing and conducting training, and enforcing anti-violence policies through appropriate discipline. In workplaces where employees arerepresented by a union, human resources may become involved in negotiating with laborrepresentatives on the structure under the organization’s workplace violence preventionand response program, including disciplinary measures to be taken following breaches ofanti-violence policies.

Human resources personnel can play a central management role before, during, and afteran incident. Often, an organization’s policies will require initial reports of threats orviolence to be directed to human resources, as well as to security and other relevantmembers of management. Following receipt of a report, human resources will contributekey skills to the incident management process. Their experience in investigating allegedviolations of workplace rules and policies equips them to weigh and strike the right balancebetween competing interests, such as the needs for confidentiality and for thoroughness.Their expertise can help prevent disciplinary decisions based on incomplete or inaccurateinformation, which could leave employers facing substantial legal liability. Further, asdiscussed in sections below, human resources personnel may be trained to conduct initialrisk level screening of reports made under an organization’s workplace violence policy.

Finally, human resources personnel can play a helpful and necessary role when anorganization is considering disciplining or terminating an employee who has violated aworkplace violence policy; when it seeks to assist an employee by referring him or her to anEmployee Assistance Program or other service; and when it is dealing with disruptions orother problems affecting employees and workgroups involved in an incident.

Legal. Legal counsel is responsible for helping an organization to meet its legal obligationsand for otherwise safeguarding the organization from legal liability. In that role, legalcounsel – whether from a firm’s own legal department or from an outside law firm – willinvolve itself in ensuring that the organization has met legal requirements related to theprevention of workplace violence, as well as assuring that the organization has consideredand properly navigated the myriad of legal issues that arise during incident management.

Before an incident, counsel serves a crucial role in helping security and human resourcesdevelop appropriate and legal policies, practices, and procedures related to violenceprevention. During an incident, counsel can advise security and human resources on anumber of legal issues that arise during incident management, including:




● Employee Rights to Privacy. Investigating a violent act or threat will frequentlyraise privacy issues – for example, in searching desks, computers, and lockers forevidence of threats or for weapons; in conducting a psychological evaluation inorder to make a violence risk assessment; in gathering personal information thatwill help assess a troublesome employee’s potential for violence; and other actionstaken, or desired to be taken, during incident management. Legal counsel helpsthe organization to define the actions that are permissible and those that mayviolate an employee’s privacy rights.

● The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). An employee whose behavior isperceived as threatening may in fact be suffering from a psychological disabilityand entitled to rights granted by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act andrelated state laws. Legal counsel can help the organization comply with theserights in situations that involve a need to terminate, discipline, or otherwisemanage an employee whose threatening or disturbing behavior may stem frommental impairment.

● Due process. An employer who terminates an employee following a reportedthreat or violent act but who has failed to properly conduct an investigation orfailed to establish sufficient grounds may be faced with claims of wrongfultermination. Legal counsel can help guide an internal investigation and help toensure full compliance with an employee’s due process rights, as shaped byconstitutional and contractual principles affecting both private and public sectoremployers.

● Discrimination. An employer must carry out workplace violence prevention andresponse policies fairly and uniformly, lest it be accused of applying those policiesin a discriminatory fashion. Oversight by legal counsel can contribute to aconsistent application of the employer’s policies, practices, and procedures relatedto violence prevention and response.

● Rights under a collective bargaining agreement. At times, an employer who actstoo swiftly to terminate a worker who has engaged in threatening or violentbehavior, or who fails to follow negotiated investigative or disciplinary processes,may be challenged by a union for violating the terms of a collective bargainingagreement. Legal counsel can help ensure an organization’s compliance with theterms of any relevant labor agreement.

Ultimately, legal counsel with expertise in the area of employment law and workplaceviolence can help the organization navigate through all aspects of workplace violenceissues, including establishing policies, practices, and procedures, investigating complaints,and enforcing anti-violence rules and policies. In all of those areas, legal counsel must workin close coordination with human resources, security personnel, and others concerned withforming and implementing an organization’s workplace violence program.

12.2. Other Important Stakeholders

In addition to security, human resources, and legal professionals, a number of other sectorswithin the employer’s structure can become involved in assisting the organization indeveloping preventive strategies and/or responding to threats and violent incidents thatoccur. These include:




Business Owners and Executive Level Managers. Executive management plays anindispensable role in ensuring that the organization has allocated adequate financialresources to developing a workplace violence prevention and response program, and forpurchasing whatever equipment, training, and outside consulting is necessary for theprogram’s implementation and success. Indeed, a ‘‘top-down’’ commitment to a workplaceviolence program is essential in setting the tone for the organization and often provesindispensable to an organization’s successful tackling of this issue.

Occupational Safety and Health Personnel. Ideally, workplace violence prevention andresponse should be viewed as an integral part of an organization’s comprehensiveoccupational injury and illness prevention program. Like other hazards in the workplace,the risk for violence can be minimized through workplace design, employee training, andworkplace polices, practices, and procedures. Towards that end, occupational safety andhealth personnel can play an important role in keeping employers and employees aware ofdevelopments in OSHA requirements or recommended guidelines bearing on violenceprevention, and in assisting the organization with compliance. In addition, should anincident occur, occupational health and safety personnel often will assist the organizationin executing OSHA record-keeping and reporting requirements.

Union Leaders. In organizations that have collective bargaining agreements, unions arelegally empowered to represent the work force and bargain with employers on terms andconditions of employment, including disciplinary policies and employee rights that must berespected during efforts to prevent violence or manage an incident. In the area ofworkplace violence, unions and management need not find themselves in an adversarialrelationship, even where discipline issues are involved, because the union also has aresponsibility to protect its members’ safety. The obligation to protect other membersagainst a potentially violent individual in the bargaining unit can often lead unionrepresentatives to align with an employer in acting against a violent or threateningemployee, in order to avoid liability for failure to protect other workers from actual orpotential harm. In high-risk industries such as health care, education, and social services,unions have played key roles in developing and implementing successful workplaceviolence prevention and response programs. Indeed, where feasible, establishing laborinvolvement in the development of workplace violence programs can help promote aninformed workforce and a collaborative relationship with respect to safety issues thatimpact everyone.

Employee Assistance Programs (EAP). EAP personnel can provide needed help or referralsfor employees who are, following reports of behaviors of concern, identified as potentiallybenefiting from counseling. EAP assistance can also help victims or affected workgroupsdeal with physical and emotional consequences following a threat or violent incident.Further, EAP can provide input to assist the incident management process, as follows:(a) where legal duties of confidentiality normally applicable to EAP personnel do not applydue to an express employee waiver or other circumstances releasing EAP personnel fromthe obligation of confidentiality; and (b) where such EAP personnel hold the requisiteexpertise described in Section 14.0 below relevant to the threat management process.

Public Relations/Corporate Communications. Specialists in the area of public relations andcorporate communications can help the organization deal with the media and other outsideparties if a newsworthy incident takes place. Their involvement, however, should not come




only after a crisis occurs. A wealth of experience teaches that information policies are farmore effective if plans – including keeping an organization’s spokespersons thoroughlyinformed while an event is in progress – are developed in advance. Furthermore, corporatecommunications can play an instrumental role in helping inform employees regarding theorganization’s workplace violence policies and procedures or practices.

Risk Management and Crisis Management Professionals. Risk management personnel helpto ensure that workers’ compensation and other necessary liability insurance policies aremaintained at appropriate levels of coverage, so that an organization is adequately insuredagainst any losses from a violent workplace incident. Such personnel, in their riskmanagement role, can also bolster efforts by the organization to implement workplaceviolence policies, practices, and procedures designed to reduce incidents of violence andresulting liability. Crisis management professionals play an important role by helping toensure that emergency situations are anticipated and planned for and by creating anintegrated management process including readiness, prevention, response, and recovery/resumption.

13.0. PREPAREDNESS AND PREVENTION

Prevention in the context of workplace violence has several facets. First, prevention denotesthe ability of an organization to intervene at the earliest opportunity when behaviors ofconcern come to light. As noted below, discernible warning signs often precede acts ofovert violence. Organizations that carry a sufficient awareness of these warning signs andthat have adopted – ahead of time – an effective process for responding to them lessen therisk of unwittingly allowing inappropriate behavior to escalate towards violence. Second,prevention denotes an organization’s ability to quickly and effectively respond when facedwith escalated situations that have evaded detection until they have reached a critical point.It ensures that the organization, when confronted with urgent circumstances, can respondin an efficient, thoughtful, and organized fashion. Finally, prevention denotes acomprehensive approach towards security. It means that the organization has, to the fullestpractical extent, adopted employment, human resources, security, and managementpractices that work together to enhance workplace safety. It is no accident that a workplaceculture that fosters professionalism and mutual respect can help prevent threats andviolence, and prepare the organization to better respond when threats or violence occur.

Preventing violence defies a rote or formulaic approach. Work forces and workingconditions will vary from one organization to another, as will the risks and challenges toemployee safety. Not all organizations will have the same resources, and not allmanagement teams will bring the same knowledge and experience to bear on violenceissues. That said, the general principles set out in the following pages can help guide anorganization toward a successful approach to workplace violence prevention.

13.1. A Needs Assessment Offers a Good First Step

A good first step for prevention in all workplaces consists of a general assessment designedto evaluate the presence of any specific risks of violence, both from within and outside theorganization. Such an assessment will help the organization to fully understand theparticular safety and security needs of the workplace – information that will help shape itsprevention efforts. For instance, a manufacturing facility may experience different




challenges and risks than a professional office environment. Similarly, although bothworkplaces are open to the public, hospitals and other health care settings will experiencea different set of risks than a retail establishment. Understanding the specific risks facedby an organization can help to ensure the development of preventive strategies appropriatefor the workplace in question. (See ASIS General Security Risk Assessment Guideline athttp://www.asisonline.org/guidelines/guidelines.htm).

TYPE I WORKPLACE VIOLENCE AND THE ‘‘HIGH RISK’’ WORKPLACE

Some industries, due to their vulnerability to crime, require a specific emphasis onprevention techniques best suited for Type I workplace violence: violence associatedwith the commission of a crime, such as theft. All-night retail establishments, taxicompanies, and other cash-and-carry enterprises, in particular, qualify as at ‘‘high risk’’for Type I workplace violence. Given the stated emphasis of this guideline on workplaceviolence Types II through IV, employers interested in prevention techniques for Type Iworkplace violence would benefit from consulting additional resources applicable toType I violence to supplement information contained in this guideline.

13.2. Managers and Employees Should Have a Basic Awareness of Warning Signs thatCan Point to Potential Violence.

Often, a violent act has been preceded by forms of behavior that signaled the violence tocome. If those signs had been recognized and appropriately addressed, the violence mightnot have happened. Typically, the earlier behavior would have warranted intervention inany case, since the precursors to violence are themselves harmful and disruptive, creatingdistrust and fear among other employees and damaging the atmosphere of the workplace.

While certain behaviors raise warning flags, there is no profile that identifies likelyperpetrators of workplace violence. No one type of conduct can predict whether someonewill or will not commit a violent act. Instead, the discipline of violence risk assessmentinvolves examining a full range of factors and circumstances, including an individual’smotives, intents, and actions, and what he or she perceives to be at stake in a givensituation. With that qualification, however, warning sign behavior can alert supervisors andmanagers to possible problems that require investigation and perhaps intervention. Suchbehavior may include:

● Threats, threatening behavior, frequent aggressive outbursts, or excessive displaysof temper

● A history of threats or violent acts

● Ominous fascination with weapons and/or references to weapons, violent mediacontent, or violent events

● Verbal abuse of coworkers and customers, or harassment through phone calls ore-mails

● Bizarre comments or behavior, especially if it includes violent content

● Holding grudges, inability to handle criticism, habitually making excuses, andblaming others




● Chronic, hypersensitive complaints about persecution or injustice

● Making jokes or offensive comments about violent acts

Such behaviors are often accompanied by job performance problems, such as inconsistentproductivity, excessive tardiness and absenteeism, and poor relations with coworkers. Thepotential for a violent act may escalate if, as a result of his or her conduct, the employeethen faces the stress of termination, demotion, other disciplinary action, or is made to feeldevalued (for example, by being harshly reprimanded by a supervisor).

13.3. Organizations Benefit from a Formal Workplace Violence Prevention andResponse Program.

Establishing a program that coherently outlines principles, policies, processes, and trainingfor violence prevention or management will help ensure that an organization will beadequately prepared to recognize and respond to behavior and circumstances that pose athreat of violence. Typically, a violence prevention program will have the followingcomponents:

13.3.1. A Written Workplace Violence Policy and Complementary Policies Focused onAppropriate Workplace Conduct

A prevention program will include a ‘‘No Threats, No Violence’’ policy that is clearlycommunicated to all employees. The policy will state the employer’s commitment toprovide a safe workplace, free from violence or the threat of violence. It will also set forth acode of employee conduct that clearly defines unacceptable behavior and prohibits allviolence and threats on-site and during work-related off-site activities. Other elements willinclude:

● The policy will require employees to promptly report any suspected violations ofthe anti-violence policy, or other disturbing circumstances that may raise aconcern for safety. To encourage the quickest and most thorough reporting,employees should have a variety of places where they can go with troublinginformation, but employees and supervisors should also know who in theorganization has the responsibility for acting on such reports – designatedpersonnel in security, human resources, safety and health, members of thecompany’s Threat Management Team, and so forth.

● The policy will set out a commitment of non-retaliation, assuring employees thatretaliation is prohibited against anyone who, in good faith, reports a possibleviolation of the workplace violence policy or cooperates in an employer-ledinvestigation.

● The policy will clearly advise employees that violations will result in discipline, upto and including termination. If the term ‘‘zero tolerance’’ is used, ideally itshould not mean uniform, automatic penalties; instead, it should mean that theorganization will not tolerate violent or threatening conduct and will imposepenalties appropriate to the nature and severity of the violation.

● The policy may require or encourage employees to inform clearly identifiedpersonnel (e.g., in the security or human resources departments and/or




designated members of the Threat Management Team) of any protective orrestraining order that they have obtained that lists the workplace as a protectedarea.

The ‘‘No Threats, No Violence’’ policy should be bolstered by complementary policies that,together with the workplace violence policy, will set clear expectations for appropriateworkplace behavior on various fronts. These policies typically will include (1) injury andillness prevention policies; (2) a no-weapons policy; (3) a harassment and discriminationpolicy; (4) a drug and alcohol use policy; (5) a code of business conduct/ethics policy; and(6) an electronic communications policy. Further, many employees adopt an inspectionpolicy that alerts employees to the employer’s right to gain access to an employee’scomputer, desk, locker, and other premises that might otherwise be viewed as private, asmay be necessary and appropriate during workplace investigations.

13.3.2. An Interdisciplinary Threat Management Team.

A workplace violence program further includes an interdisciplinary team created andtrained to manage any violent incidents or reports of troubling behavior made under theworkplace violence policy. Instead of waiting for a threat or violent incident to occur andthen making ad hoc decisions regarding who will handle it and how, a company shouldcreate and train an interdisciplinary Threat Management Team so that procedures and linesof authority will be clear as soon as a threat or violent emergency occurs. The elements of amultidisciplinary approach and the composition of a Threat Management Team arediscussed in Section 11 (Workplace Violence – A Broad Concern for Employers) of thisguideline. Overall, it is important that an organization pick the right personnel – that is,members of management who possess the requisite experience, training, authority, andtemperament – to carry out the often difficult duties of the Threat Management Team in asuccessful, collaborative fashion.

The appointment of a Threat Management Team should be accompanied by theidentification of qualified external resources that the team may need to supplement itswork during the course of incident management. For example, an organization may decideto seek out professional specialists in the area of violence risk assessment, who can becalled on for consultation when threats or potential violence occur and to assist in trainingand other preventive practices. Additionally, the organization may benefit from consultingan attorney with expertise in employment law who is also familiar with the special issuespresented by efforts to prevent and manage threats and violence affecting the workplace.




THE TEAM ENVIRONMENT AND THE USE OF EXTERNAL EXPERTS

An important maxim that applies to both prevention and incident management is thenotion that no one ‘‘goes it alone.’’ Instead, as emphasized throughout this guideline,effective prevention and management requires a team approach. Ideally, anorganization at the early stages of its program development will conduct a candidassessment of the internal resources it can bring to bear on violence prevention andmanagement efforts. Does the organization employ personnel with the requisiteexperience, training, authority, and temperament to work effectively as ThreatManagement Team members and/or as members of a program implementation team?

Often, an organization will supplement its internal expertise with outside experts,particularly in the areas of violence risk assessment, law, and security. Organizationsthat successfully engage the help of external experts will – in the program developmentstages – identify, evaluate, and select professionals with documented expertise andexperience specific to workplace violence prevention and management. Those qualifiedprofessionals can lend significant help in both the planning and implementation stagesof a prevention program, as well as during any later incident management.

13.3.3. A Clear Incident Management Process.

Response procedures should be developed and taught in advance. A workplace violenceprogram typically will outline a pre-determined process by which reports of violence policyviolations will be investigated and resolved. This process is discussed in Section 14 below(Threat Response and Incident Management).

13.3.4. Centralized Record Keeping.

Employers should keep good records while protecting confidentiality. An organization’sworkplace violence program should include a system of centralized record keeping, makingsure that all reports of violations are recorded and tracked. A system of centralized recordkeeping becomes especially important in large organizations, in which offenders can attimes move around the organization. Record keeping will also allow for ongoing monitoringof incidents to identify high-risk areas within the workplace or customers, clients, orpatients who repeatedly victimize workers.

All information in such reports should be handled with the highest degree ofconfidentiality and shared on a strict ‘‘need-to-know’’ basis for the purposes of incidentmanagement and follow-up monitoring.

13.3.5. Training.

A workplace violence program should include periodic training for employees, supervisors,and members of the Threat Management Team.

● Training for employees should acquaint them with the organization’s violenceprevention principles and procedures, to ensure that employees understand theirown obligations to observe policy and to recognize and report inappropriate




behavior or circumstances to management and to be aware of internal andexternal resources available to deal with issues and behaviors of concern.

● Training for supervisors should cover information that will enable them to betterdetect behaviors of concern, and to properly handle a report from an employee.Furthermore, training should clarify, in particular, company policies regardingdiscipline and confidentiality.

● Training for Threat Management Team members, human resources personnel,legal advisers, and security personnel should cover the broad range of workplaceviolence issues treated in this guideline.

Besides presenting the company’s specific workplace violence policies and procedures,training topics – in broad terms – can include: (1) basic facts about workplace violence,including risk factors a particular workplace could face; (2) behavioral issues, identifyingproblem behavior, and recognizing warning signs of potential violence; (3) pertinent legalissues; (4) investigative and incident management techniques; (5) where relevant,appropriate responses during robberies or the commission of other crimes; (6) strategies foraddressing domestic violence issues that may affect the workplace.

Often, core Threat Management Team members will receive the most detailed andcomprehensive training regarding risk screening and assessment and multi-disciplinary casemanagement strategies.

13.3.6. Specific Strategies for High Risk Workplaces.

Special guidelines are available for industries with a particularly high incidence ofworkplace violence. Employers in high-risk businesses, including health care (especiallymental health facilities), taxi service, and all-night retail, can consult guidelines publishedby Fed-OSHA and its counterparts on the state level and NIOSH for suggested securitymeasures and other elements of a company violence prevention program.6 Public sectoremployees, security professionals, and those in education also face special risks that shouldbe explicitly addressed.

13.3.7. Additional Prevention Strategies.

Additional policies and procedures or practices can strengthen preventive efforts. Inaddition to the core workplace violence prevention and response program, organizationscan adopt an array of security, employment, legal, and management practices that can helpprevent threats and violence, and prepare the organization to better respond when threatsor violence occur.

In the area of security, for example, an organization can conduct a physical securityassessment to determine vulnerabilities and identify possible improvements in the plant oroffice, such as better access control and visitor management, intrusion detection and alarmmonitoring, closed circuit television and other surveillance systems, lock down procedures,safer design of office or work space, and installation of panic alarm devices.

6 See Speer (2003).




Employment, legal, and management practices may include:

● Creating and sustaining a workplace culture that fosters professionalism andmutual respect among employees and between employees and managers

● The general implementation of effective and fair disciplinary practices

● Care in hiring, including the use of criminal background checks, whereappropriate and legally available, to screen out applicants with a history of violentcrime, within legal limits

● Effective use of referrals both to an organization’s own employee assistanceprogram and to outside agencies, such as counselors and community serviceagencies concerned with domestic violence issues

● The pursuit of legal remedies, such as restraining orders, when the conduct ofemployees or third parties raises a concern for worker safety

● Safe termination practices, such as consultation with a specialist in the area ofviolence risk assessment and the involvement of security personnel in thetermination of employees whose behavior has raised a concern with possibleviolence

● A conflict resolution or mediation process to assist an organization in addressingnormal, work-related, interpersonal tensions and conflicts that might arise amongcoworkers

13.4. Organizations Should Develop Strategies for Successful Program Implementation.

Beyond designing a workplace violence program, an organization should carefully considerhow it can successfully implement the program. Without the appropriate commitment,resources, and implementation plan, even the most well-thought-out workplace violenceprogram will have trouble getting past the design phase.

The nature and sequence of steps an organization may take to create and implement aworkplace violence program will depend on a variety of factors, including the size,characteristics, culture, and resources of that organization. Implementation, however, canbest be thought of as a series of steps that, over time, help ensure full ‘‘buy in’’ andunderstanding of preventive practices throughout an organization. For instance:7

13.4.1. Phase One: Designate a Group to Generate Top-Down Commitment and Implementthe Program.

Designate a small group to develop a workplace violence program and lead efforts toimplement the program. Typically, this group will include human resources, security, andlegal professionals. It also may be appropriate to include occupational safety and healthpersonnel and labor or employee representatives. Often, members of this implementationgroup will become assigned to the organization’s Threat Management Team.

7 The following material is adapted from Speer, R. Workplace Violence: A Preparedness Guide for Santa Clara County Employers(1998).




Top-down commitment is critical to a successful program. Educate the designated planninggroup on the broad range of workplace violence issues treated in these guidelines, so thatthe group can in turn educate executive or senior management regarding the need for aprogram. At times, executive briefings aimed at senior management prove helpful indeveloping top-level ‘‘buy in.’’ Ultimately, it is important to ensure that the planning groupenjoys the full support of executive or senior management for the time and resources thatwill be required to develop and implement the program.

13.4.2. Phase Two: Design the Program and Establish a Plan for Its Implementation.

Draft a preliminary outline of a prevention program that fits the organization’s resourcesand needs. Review information and guidelines available from government and privatesources to get a sense of the components that may be included. Consider seeking guidancefrom other organizations that have implemented a workplace violence program. Consultwith legal counsel regarding the possible need to negotiate aspects of the program with anyexisting labor unions.

Identify and build relationships with professionals with workplace violence expertise fromthe areas of security, law, and/or psychology who may help develop an effective and legallysound workplace violence program and who later can help the Threat Management Teamaddress workplace violence issues should they arise in the organization.

Set deadlines for the systematic development and implementation of a program.

13.4.3. Phase Three: Establish a Threat Management Team and Develop an IncidentManagement Protocol.

Designate a Threat Management Team who will be given responsibility for receiving,investigating, and resolving reports of circumstances that raise a concern for employeesafety. This team also may be responsible for the ongoing review of incidents to identifypatterns and develop additional prevention strategies.

Develop an incident management protocol (discussed in Section 14 below) that can befollowed as reports come into the Threat Management Team. As part of that protocol,identify outside resources (such as risk assessment and legal specialists) that can be calledupon to supplement the expertise of the team and assist in incident management. Ensurethat your incident management protocol includes the importance of keeping properdocumentation and establishing record-keeping practices.

Train team members concerning the proper investigation and resolution of employeereports and record keeping. Often, training may be facilitated by outside experts.

13.4.4. Phase Four: Develop and Disseminate a Workplace Violence Policy.

With the Threat Management Team and response mechanism in place, draft a meaningfulworkplace violence policy. Secure the review and approval of the policy from seniormanagement, as well as legal counsel.




Disseminate the workplace violence policy statement to all employees, emphasizing inparticular policies encouraging employees to report threats or behavior that mayforeshadow a violent act, or workplace circumstances that may heighten the risk of anincident. Post the written workplace violence policy with a list of all team members and 24-hour contact information.

13.4.5. Phase Five: Roll Out Training Throughout the Organization.

In conjunction with, or following, training of the Threat Management Team, trainpersonnel likely to play an important role in preventive practices: in particular, humanresources and security personnel. As resources permit, provide training to managers andline supervisors, and to employees at large, to ensure an understanding of their respectiveresponsibilities under the workplace violence program. Ultimately, it is important that allemployees are made aware of the organization’s workplace violence program, and of theirrespective responsibilities under the program.

13.4.6. Phase Six: Implement Other Preventive Practices.

At whatever juncture it becomes feasible and appropriate, consider and developemployment, legal, and security practices that can further the organization’s preventivegoals.

For instance, consider the appropriateness of pre-employment screening. Develop andimplement protocols for addressing domestic violence issues in the workplace. Conduct ahazard inventory or review to determine the organization’s particular security needs. Assessthe need for security equipment, designs, procedures, and controls. Develop andimplement baseline, heightened, and emergency security measures and protocols.

13.4.7. Phase Seven: Monitor and Evaluate.

Once a workplace violence program has been implemented, schedule periodic teammeetings to assess the effectiveness of the program. Review, evaluate, and revise policies,practices, and procedures as necessary. Base the assessment not only on a review ofindividual incidents, but on the overall numbers and patterns of incidents affecting theworkplace.

14.0. THREAT RESPONSE AND INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

In the great majority of cases, the effort of managing a threat of violence will go through anumber of stages, beginning when the Threat Management Team receives a report ofthreatening behavior or violent conduct by an employee or someone else – a customer,visitor, or intruder. If the initial report indicates an emergency, with a violent act alreadyoccurring or appearing imminent, the appropriate managers will carry out an immediateemergency response, calling 911 (if coworkers or security personnel have not already doneso), contacting other emergency responders, and taking steps to get other workers awayfrom the violent event and out of danger (for example, evacuating a floor or a building ifsomeone has used or displayed a gun).




If the initial report does not call for immediate emergency action, the team is likely toproceed through the following steps:

● Getting additional information and conducting a preliminary risk evaluation

● Taking initial actions based on the violence risk assessment (while continuing toinvestigate and evaluate)

● Determining and putting into effect the appropriate response measures

● Bringing the incident to a conclusion, if possible before anyone is injured

● Following up with appropriate intervention

● Considering measures that can be taken to prevent similar incidents

● Monitoring the situation for any new threats of violence

Following is a review of each of those stages and some of the important issues and optionsassociated with them:




3. Initial Actions by Threat Team

Further data collection Further risk level screening Conferring with other team members Professional risk assessment consultation

1. Initial Notification of Incident of Concern

From various sources: internal or external to company Possible recipients: Human resources, security, legal, safety personnel, line managers

4. Risk Management Strategy Options

Coordinated by Threat Team

Continuing data collection Security measures/law enforcement Background investigations Professional risk assessment Defusing and treatment interventions Legal guidance and actions Employment status actions Workgroup and victim interventions

5. Safe Resolution Monitoring

Escalation of Warning Signs

Emergency Options

Immediate Crisis Resolved

Risk Level: Low Moderate High Imminent None or

Case information forwarded to designated Threat Team member

2. Initial Data Gathering and Risk Screening by Threat Team

Team not required

Non-Risk Related

Follow Up

Source: Stephen G. White, Ph.D., and Work Trauma Services, Inc. (2005).

FIGURE 2. THE INCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROCESS




14.1. Initial Notification.

Conduct or circumstances that raise concern about possible violence can be reported fromvarious sources, within or outside the organization. Often, such reports are received by linemanagers, security, human resources, or other designated personnel. It is important thatmanagers and others who are likely to receive these first reports have a basicunderstanding of circumstances and warning signs that point to potential violence and beaware of their need to forward reports to the designated Threat Management Teammembers. All managers should know who is on the Threat Management Team and whoshould be immediately informed of any threats.

It is self-evident that the more quickly a threat is reported, the better the chance ofcontaining an event before any violence takes place or, in the event of an injury incident, ofminimizing the harmful consequences and preventing a recurrence. There are a number ofways for an organization to increase the likelihood of prompt reporting, including:

● Establishing multiple avenues for reporting, within a system that funnels reportsto a Threat Management Team

● Communicating to employees that the organization will treat all reports seriouslyand with the highest degree of discretion

● Assuring everyone in the workplace that there will be no retaliation for making areport under the workplace violence program

14.2. Initial Data Gathering and Preliminary Risk Screening.

Once a report is received, a member of the Threat Management Team can be designated togather additional information and reach a preliminary assessment of the level of risk posedby the behavior or circumstances in question. The first task is to determine and document,to the extent possible, the ‘‘who, what, where, when, and why’’ of an incident. Once thatinformation is available, the next step is to evaluate the risk of a violent act.

The following list of questions – adapted in part from a violence risk assessment instrumentdeveloped by the U.S. Secret Service and similar to questions used by the FBI’s NationalCenter for the Analysis of Violent Crime, Behavioral Analysis Unit – can prove helpful inguiding risk assessments in a workplace setting. Many of the answers to these questions arenot initially available; and, in a given case, some may be particularly difficult to answer.Caution and good judgment are always necessary in pursuing information in a manner thatdoes not complicate the threat management process, and in a manner that properlybalances the need for thoroughness with the need for promptness.

The questions fall under two categories: those seeking to establish factors representing arisk of violence and those seeking to disclose factors that may lower the risk.

Following are some key questions aimed at identifying risk factors:

● What is motivating the individual to make the statements or take the actions thatled to concerns about the safety of the workplace and its employees?




● What has the individual communicated to anyone concerning his or herintentions, whether by threats or other disclosures or actions?

● What interest has the individual shown in violence or its justification, violentperpetrators, weapons, or extremist groups?

● Has the individual engaged in planning and preparation for violence, such asapproaching a target or site, breaching security, or surveilling, harassing, orstalking a target?

● Does the individual have a current or past history of a mental disorder orsubstance abuse? Has the individual exhibited symptoms of paranoia, delusionalideas, hallucinations, extreme agitation, despondency, or suicidal tendencies,especially with any violent content? Has he or she ever acted on such beliefs?

● What kinds of serious oppositional or counterproductive attitudes or behaviordoes the individual present in the workplace? For example, does the individualblame others or exhibit a strong sense of entitlement, defensiveness, self-centeredness, or intolerance of others’ rights?

● How does the individual manifest any anger problems, and how focused is thisanger on other individuals in the workplace?

● Has the individual experienced (or is he or she likely to in the near future) anyserious personal or financial stressors, such as divorce, custody disputes, job orstatus losses, or deaths in the family? Does he or she show poor coping skills inreaction to such events?

● What is the individual’s known history of serious interpersonal conflict, violence,or other criminal conduct, in domestic or other settings?

● What is the nature of any organizational, supervisor, or work group problems thathave contributed to, provoked, or exacerbated the situation, and how do thoseproblems influence the individual’s perception of his or her circumstances?

The second group of key questions aims at disclosing factors that may lower the risk ofviolence:

● Does the individual have positive, valued, family, or other personal attachments?

● Has the individual expressed genuine remorse for making threats or engaging inthe behavior that has generated a concern for safety?

● Has the individual responded positively to defusing or limit-setting efforts byothers?

● Has the individual engaged in appropriate problem solving or sought professionaltreatment or legal recourse as a way to manage the situation or problems at issue?

Upon the completion of the initial risk assessment, situations that are evaluated aspresenting no or low risk of violence are referred for follow-up and resolution outside thethreat management process, for example through relevant human resources channels. Allother situations are referred to the Threat Management Team for further review.




14.3. Initial Actions by Threat Management Team.

When an initial risk assessment indicates greater than a low risk of violence, the ThreatManagement Team should take some initial steps based on the data available at the timeand its preliminary opinion regarding risk level. Team members may:

● Collect further data

● Confer with other, appropriate organizational members

● Consult with external violence risk assessment and risk management specialists,and/or with legal counsel

WHEN TO ASK FOR HELP: THE PROFESSIONAL VIOLENCE RISK ASSESSMENT

Through proper training and accumulated experience, an organization’s ThreatManagement Team, depending on its composition, can become adept at screeningcases for the potential risk of violence. Threat Management Team members, however,should recognize situations that, due to their apparent severity or complexity, wouldclearly benefit from the added expertise of outside risk assessment and/or incidentmanagement professionals. A team that acknowledges the limits of its expertise andexperience is more apt to get the help it needs for successful incident management.

14.4. Threat Response Actions Coordinated by the Threat Management Team.

Depending on the initial level of perceived risk, the team will implement and coordinatevarious measures to further assess and manage any risk of violence. These measures mayinclude:

● A deeper investigation: for instance, a further internal investigation and/or anexternal investigation, such as a thorough criminal background check

● A professional violence risk assessment conducted of the person(s) in question

● Security measures covering the workplace generally or the specific person(s) atrisk

● Legal actions, such as restraining orders when feasible and appropriate

● Employment actions, such as suspension, discipline, or termination of theperson(s) in question, transfers or administrative leaves for person(s) at risk

● Referrals to professional help

● A report of criminal activity to law enforcement, or other law enforcementintervention

● Any other defusing interventions that might be appropriate and effective

● Strategies to address fears or other issues among affected workgroups

Legal oversight is often necessary or desirable, particularly with respect to activities such asmanaging various aspects of an employment relationship, devising flexible separationarrangements, securing a restraining or protective order, and shaping appropriate incident-related communications.




Each case is unique, and there is no single or formulaic approach that can be applied inevery situation. However, the above outline, which includes recognized and testedinterventions and responses, can serve as a broad guideline for most situations.Considerable discussion is often needed among the Threat Management Team, relevantmembers of management, and other stakeholders in devising the most appropriate strategyfor any particular case.

14.5. Concluding an Incident.

When a situation is judged to have been safely resolved, remaining issues can be referredback to line managers, human resources personnel, or other appropriate organizationalauthorities. Once an incident is over, the Threat Management Team should undertake acareful review of what happened, reexamining both the circumstances of the precipitatingevent and the response to it. The purpose of the review will be to determine if any changein workplace conditions or policies or in violence response procedures could help avoidsimilar incidents in the future, or manage them more effectively if any occur.

14.6. Monitoring.

All those involved in the incident and its management should remain alert for any newinformation that might require additional action, either with respect to the specificsituation at issue or the workplace in general.

14.7. Responding to a Violent Incident in the Workplace.

Despite all efforts made to prevent it, organizations need to acknowledge the possibility ofviolence occurring in the workplace, and of employees being injured or killed. Immediatelyfollowing a violent incident, security officers and other managers will be working closelywith public safety officials to assist with medical emergencies and assure that employeesare no longer in danger. If the incident was a serious one, organizational representativesmay also have to manage media attention and family members seeking information andcontact with loved ones. Pressure for information from journalists and relatives will beintense in more spectacular cases involving multiple casualties or other newsworthycircumstances. Sound contingency planning for such an event will help manage thepressure more smoothly and effectively. As one example, an evacuation plan should notjust provide for employees to get clear of a site, but should specify an assembly place or asystem for reporting in, so that supervisors can quickly begin to find out who is safe andwho may be missing or still in danger.

A violent event, particularly one that involves death or serious injury or a prolonged periodof intense fear, has longer-range consequences that should also be considered in incident-response planning. Managers should be aware of the emotional impact on employees andthe kinds of support and leadership that will help restore a feeling of security and a normalwork atmosphere. They should also be aware of specialized crisis management and traumacounseling resources that may be available, from the organization’s own employeeassistance program or from outside agencies.

Responding to a major workplace violence event should include:




● Developing protocols for coordinating the work of the Threat Management Teamin responding to an incident with the organization’s crisis management personneland/or business continuity plans (see ASIS Business Continuity Guideline athttp://www.asisonline.org/guidelines/guidelines.htm)

● Designating and training an interdisciplinary team that will be assigned after anincident takes place to assess its impact on the business and its employees

● Establishing procedures to provide timely, accurate updates to variousconstituents (employees, family members, and the media) on the facts of an eventand the organization’s ongoing response

● Implementing procedures for EAPs, medical/health care departments, and outsidespecialists to monitor employees for more severe post-trauma emotional problemsand need for care

Employers should be mindful that reactions to trauma and grief will vary and that stressintervention needs to be tailored to different needs, rather than applied in a one-size-fits-all manner. For example, debriefing sessions conducted by professional counselors can behelpful for some, but not necessarily all, who have been through a violent or terrifyingevent. Participation in debriefing should be optional, rather than mandatory. In varyingdegrees, however, it can be expected that most employees will share a need to feel safefrom any recurrence of dangerous circumstances, to be told forthrightly what happenedand why, and to know the status of colleagues, family members, or others.

Employees will also need evidence that the employer cares about what happened andabout their feelings. Employers should be careful to avoid inflicting what has been called‘‘the second injury,’’ which can be caused if executives or managers seem to be slighting orminimizing the employee’s experience.

Lastly, providers of any kind of help to trauma victims, including managers, securityprofessionals, and human resources personnel, may experience their own stress reactions.This ‘‘cost of caring’’ may be minimized by (a) various ‘‘stress inoculation’’ methodsdesigned to desensitize individuals to the impact of stress during major stressor events,(b) education and preparedness, and (c) active stress reduction techniques during and afterintense periods of providing help to others.

15.0. INTEGRATING THE ISSUE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTO WORKPLACEVIOLENCE PREVENTION STRATEGIES

It might not be readily evident to all employers, but domestic violence can have asignificant impact on workplace safety. When an employee is in an abusive relationship, itis not uncommon for the abuser to seek out the abused partner at work, endangering notonly the victim but possibly coworkers as well. Every year, according to a JusticeDepartment study, approximately 18,700 violent workplace events are committed by anintimate of the victim: a current or former spouse, lover, partner, or boyfriend/girlfriend.8

8 Duhart (2001).




In addition to its impact on safety, domestic violence costs employers in many ways. Suchcosts include employee tardiness and absenteeism, decreased ability to concentrate, lowermorale, higher turnover, and increased health care costs. According to the U. S. Centers forDisease Control (CDC), approximately 5.3 million intimate partner violence victimizationsoccur each year among U.S. women ages 18 and older. The CDC found that these victimslose a total of nearly 8.0 million days of paid work—the equivalent of more than 32,000full-time jobs – and nearly 5.6 million days of household productivity a year as a result ofthe violence perpetrated against them by their intimate partners.9 Accordingly, an effectiveworkplace violence prevention and response effort should address the problem of domesticviolence. Measures to prevent domestic violence-related incidents when threats presentthemselves at the workplace fall within the employer’s broader legal obligation to preventviolence and provide a safe workplace.

In incorporating domestic violence issues into a workplace violence prevention plan, anemployer should consider the following strategies, some of which may be appropriatelyapplied to workplace violence issues irrespective of their domestic violence component:

15.1. Commitment.

An employer’s workplace violence policy should reflect a commitment to support domesticviolence victims and to take protective steps when such violence threatens to intrude onthe workplace, as part of an employer’s obligation to provide a safe workplace. A workplaceviolence policy should cover abusers as well, making it an offense to threaten or harasssomeone (in the same workplace or elsewhere) while on the job or with the use of theemployer’s equipment, such as phones, cell phones, faxes, and computers.

15.2. Multidisciplinary Approach.

As with workplace violence in general, the most effective response to domestic violenceissues arising in the workplace will be a multidisciplinary one, drawing on the knowledgeand skills of security, human resources, and legal departments with support from seniormanagement and other parts of the organizational structure. Members of the ThreatManagement Team should receive training regarding domestic violence and methods ofresponding to cases involving the workplace. Appropriate training regarding the basics ofdomestic violence is available, often at no cost, from community groups that providedomestic violence services.

15.3. Recognition.

Supervisors and security personnel should learn how to better recognize signs of domesticviolence and understand how it may affect workplace safety. A critical point is thatdomestic violence typically escalates in frequency and intensity over time. For instance, anabuser may first begin to harass an employee at work by telephone or e-mail, thenthreaten to come to the workplace, and finally, come to threaten or attack in person.Warning signs that an employee may be a domestic violence victim can include:

9 U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Costs of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in the United States. 2003.




● Injuries such as bruises, black eyes, broken bones, especially if he or she tries toconceal them or offers unconvincing explanations for how they occurred

● Uncharacteristic absenteeism or lateness, poor concentration, increasing errors,and inconsistent work quality

● Requests for special accommodation, such as leaving early or time off to attendcourt

● Signs of emotional distress, such as unusual quietness, or keeping away fromothers

● An unusual number of phone calls, faxes, or emails from a current or formerpartner, and a reluctance to converse or respond to phone messages

● Abrupt changes of address or reluctance to divulge where he or she is staying

15.4. Prevention.

Employers’ preventive steps can include some of the same steps outlined in the sectionsabove, including clearly communicating the organization’s workplace violence policy duringorientation of new employees and through regular communication with the entire workforce. In addition, employers might consider taking the following additional steps:

● Teaching employees the basics of domestic violence, including signs of an abusiverelationship

● Encouraging employees to contact supervisors, human resources, or securitypersonnel about any concerns related to domestic violence, without fear for theirjobs or career prospects

● Informing employees how and where they can find legal, psychological, orfinancial assistance with a domestic violence problem, and making sureemployees know whom to approach

15.5. Legal Issues.

The federal Family Medical Leave Act, covering employers with 50 or more employees,requires employers to offer up to 12 work weeks of unpaid leave in a variety ofcircumstances, including an employee’s ‘‘serious health condition’’ or a family member’s‘‘serious medical condition.’’ In some cases, that provision may be applicable to a domesticviolence situation.

Additionally, many states have laws protecting domestic violence victims in the workplace,such as laws that prohibit dismissal of victims of domestic violence solely because they arevictims or because they were required to take time from work to obtain a protective order.Some states require employers to give employees time off for reasons related to intimatepartner violence, such as going to counseling or receiving medical attention. At least 27states have enacted laws that help protect the employment status of domestic violencevictims who need time from work to attend court proceedings or obtain an order ofprotection. National and state domestic violence organizations can provide the current lawfor the state(s) in which an employer operates.




15.6. Detection, Investigation, and Risk Assessment.

In domestic violence cases, unlike most other violent incidents, it is not uncommon for avictim to try to conceal that a threat or attack has occurred. Employers do not have anunlimited right to pry into an employee’s private life, but do have a responsibility to takereasonable steps to detect violence or threats that may affect their business and their otherworkers. It is appropriate to educate supervisors and other relevant personnel regardinghow to approach coworkers if they notice signs of possible abuse. Recommendedapproaches include telling the person what has been observed (‘‘I noticed the bruises youhad last week and see that you look upset and worried today over the telephone calls youhave been receiving.’’) and offering a statement of support (‘‘I am concerned about youand your safety.’’).

Supervisors and other involved personnel would benefit from knowing what domesticviolence resources exist, at the workplace or outside, so that they may forward thatinformation to affected employees. If an employee denies or seeks to minimize the fact thathe or she is being abused, an employer can respond with a statement such as, ‘‘I amrelieved that everything is fine. However, if you are ever in need of assistance, we are hereto provide you with the resources available at our organization as well as those within ourcommunity.’’ This shows support and leaves the door open for future discussions if threatsbecome more serious or abuse worsens.

All those in an organization who are charged with responding to possible threats stemmingfrom a suspected abusive relationship should be aware of two important considerations:

● The most dangerous moment in an abusive relationship typically occurs when thevictim tries to separate from the abuser. An employer should try, within the limitsof respect for an employee’s privacy, to know when a threatened employee isattempting to break off a relationship, and increase precautions accordingly.

● Employees who are victims of domestic violence and also belong to an immigrantcommunity often face particular cultural complications. Along with theinterventions that would be made for any employee, the employer should befamiliar with local domestic violence organizations that serve specific immigrantpopulations, and refer cases when a member of that population is identified asthreatened or abused.

Once a domestic violence victim has been identified, the next step is to assess the threatlevel that the abuser may pose for the workplace. Because the threatened employee is theone who can best tell managers or security personnel who is engaging in threats, what thatperson might do, and how a risk of violence may pertain to the workplace, ThreatManagement Team members or others responsible for gathering data should be taught themost appropriate and effective ways to ask questions and get the information that will helpthem take the most effective precautions.

The following questions – which supplement questions listed in Section 14 above – canprove helpful in evaluating a potential threat. Furthermore, the documentation of responsesmay be useful to the employer or law enforcement agencies in the event of subsequent civilor criminal court action:




● Has the victim recently broken off the relationship, or is the victim consideringdoing so? How did the abuser react?

● Have there been threats? If so, how specific were they, and how credible does thevictim believe them to be?

● Has the victim petitioned for or been granted a court order of protection? Has theabuser violated a protective order in the past?

● Does the abuser have a history of violence? Has the abuser ever been arrested forany criminal offense?

● Does the abuser have access to weapons? Has the abuser recently acquired one?(Research suggests that recent acquisition of a weapon can be a much moredangerous indicator than having a gun that has been owned for many years.10)

● Has the abuser engaged in stalking behaviors? Has stalking taken place at thevictim’s workplace?

Threat Management Team members and/or their outside specialists would assist ininvestigating and assessing the risk to the workplace in the more serious cases; overall,inquiry regarding domestic violence-related incidents and threats would comply withprinciples outlined in Section 14 above.

15.7. Privacy Issues.

There are no easy answers in balancing employee privacy with a desire to assist in cases ofdomestic violence. Employers should make it clear that once they have been informed of athreat that may involve the workplace, a victim cannot expect the employer to refrain fromacting to maintain workplace safety. At the same time, it is important that precautions betaken as sensitively and unobtrusively as possible to protect the victim’s privacy, as well asphysical safety, and to avoid discouraging others from reporting possible violence. Victimsare entitled to concern and support from supervisors and security personnel and should beconfident that their circumstances will be made known only to those who need theinformation to protect the workplace against a violent event.

Employees must also understand that the electronic information systems used in aworkplace, including e-mail, voicemail, and computers, belong to the organization and thatemployees using such equipment typically have no legal right to shield theircommunications on privacy grounds.

15.8. Safety/Security Measures.

When an employee is identified as being in danger from an abusive partner, anorganization can take a variety of steps to heighten security. These can include distributingthe suspected abuser’s photograph to security personnel, receptionists, and coworkers, sothat he or she can be identified and denied entrance before getting to the victim’sworkspace. Employers may adopt additional preventive measures, as may be appropriate.

10 Paziotopoulos, P. Domestic Violence in the Workplace. Workplace Violence Prevention Manual. STP Publisher. 2002.




In addition, possible domestic violence victims can be given parking spaces closer to theentrance, or be provided with a security escort to cars or public transportation. Other stepsthat might be considered include changing working hours, removing the employee’s namefrom staff office or telephone directories, and screening phone calls. Employers can suggestthat employees who seek a protective order ask to have potential abusers banned from theemployee’s work address, as well as from his or her home; in some states, an employer canobtain such an order on its own. Decisions regarding protective orders should be made inthe context of an overall case management strategy.

15.9. When Employees Are Abusers.

As a general rule, victims of partner violence are more readily identified and are morelikely to seek help than are abusers. However, organizations that are committed topreventing intimate partner violence at the workplace, and to maintaining a safe workplacegenerally, should also address the issue of employees who perpetrate or threaten violenceagainst their partners, whether at the same workplace or elsewhere.

Employers should clearly enforce workplace safety rules by appropriately investigatingsuspected misconduct and disciplining (including terminating) any employee who is shownto have used the employer’s time, equipment, or other resources to harass, threaten, orharm an abused partner – whether that abused partner is an employee or not.

Some employers, upon learning that an employee is an abuser, may offer treatmentthrough Employee Assistance Programs (EAP), in the hope that some batterers will bewilling to acknowledge their conduct and seek help before violence escalates. In referringan employee for treatment, EAP should look for accredited and standardized batterers’intervention programs, rather than reflexively send the employee to non-specific ‘‘angermanagement’’ or substance abuse counseling. Most domestic violence experts cautionagainst recommending marital or couples counseling.

15.10. Documentation.

Employers should document every report of domestic violence or threatened abuse in theworkplace, no matter how minor. Documentation kept by the employer should chieflyreflect workplace events; incidents of abuse away from the workplace may be briefly noted.Documentation should include a record of any appearances or communications from theabuser.

As with any record pertaining to workplace violence incident management, records relatingto a domestic violence situation should be kept secure and confidential, with informationdistributed only on a strict ‘‘need to know’’ basis and kept separate from an employee’sregular work performance or personnel information.

15.11. Referrals.

All members of the Threat Management Team should be clear about the knowledge andskills that each member brings to the team. Security and other involved personnel are notexpected to be domestic violence experts and should not undertake to play a ‘‘counseling’’




role with respect to any suspected victim of abuse or an abusive partner. However, suchpersonnel can assist an organization’s safety and humanitarian goals by knowing how andwhere to refer victims (and in other cases, perpetrators) for the best available assistance.Security personnel and others on the Threat Management Team should be broadly familiarwith the services offered by local domestic violence victim advocates and service providers,batterers’ intervention programs, law enforcement agencies, and district attorneys’ offices.

16.0. THE ROLE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

Even the best violence prevention plan cannot guarantee that no violent act will ever occur.While not every workplace incident will reach the level of criminal conduct, cases thatinvolve physical assault or significant destruction of property or serious threats, especiallywith a weapon, will as a general rule require intervention by law enforcement and possiblyother public safety agencies as well.

Law enforcement’s role as an emergency responder is highly familiar. If a situation arises ina workplace that puts life or personal safety or property in immediate danger, any businessowner or manager will know that a 911 call will quickly bring police and other emergencypersonnel, if needed, to the scene. Once there, law enforcement officers have theresponsibility for controlling the situation and ending the threat, and, in many cases, forarresting the offender and gathering evidence for criminal prosecution.

Emergency response, however, is not the law enforcement community’s only role inworkplace violence. Employers should be aware that establishing contact and exchanginginformation with local police or sheriff’s departments before a violent act occurs can bevery helpful in developing and administering an organization’s workplace violence program.An existing relationship and communication channel between an organization and locallaw enforcement may also make the response more effective if an emergency arises.

Law enforcement agencies in different jurisdictions have different laws, policies, budgets,manpower, and competencies, and may have different priorities and different attitudes oncooperating with employers in workplace violence prevention and response efforts. Indeveloping workplace violence plans, employers should find out how their local policedepartments would answer questions such as:

● What is your standard response to a report of a suspicious person on our propertyor in our building? How will you respond to a report of an unauthorized personon the property or in the building with a firearm?

● Do you have a policy of investigating threats before any injury occurs? What isyour position on responding to conduct that creates fear, such as threatening,bullying, and intimidation, but that may not be characterized as criminal?

● What is the procedure following a report of a crime in progress at our facility?

● How long do you estimate it will take to reach the scene after an emergency call?

In establishing a channel of communication with a law enforcement agency, it is preferablefor an organization to designate one person as its permanent liaison with the police. It iseven better if the police department also provides a single point of contact. Many policeagencies have assigned personnel to work in the area of crime prevention, and an




organization’s initial call should be directed to the person overseeing crime preventionefforts, if such a position exists.

Once the communication channel has been established, the organization’s representativecan use it to:

● Make sure the police have correct information about the organization in its recordsystem (often a computerized database). Data such as address, telephonenumber(s), and the physical layout of the site, including main power and waterlocations, should be on file, along with the name and 24-hour contactinformation for the appropriate contact person(s).

● Ask what additional information might be put on file to help police respond moreeffectively in an emergency (fire and evacuation plans or locations of hazardousmaterials or high value goods, for example).

● Find out if the department offers any crime prevention outreach programs thatcould be useful to the organization’s executives or employees.

● Ascertain the police agency’s policy on responding to non-criminal butthreatening behavior, and determine what information the organization will sharewith police in such incidents.

● Get advice on planning and possible assistance or support from law enforcementwhen a situation or event may create a heightened risk of violence. Possibleexamples include announcements of layoffs, an adversarial termination, orknowledge that an employee is in an abusive personal relationship.

A cooperative relationship with local police can also benefit an organization by providing achannel to resources that can only be accessed through law enforcement agencies. Forexample, if an organization is concerned about a potentially dangerous employee, and thiscooperative relationship with law enforcement has been established, the local police couldcontact the FBI’s National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime (NCAVC) at Quantico,Virginia. At a police agency’s request, NCAVC may agree to conduct a violence riskassessment and advise on possible intervention strategies, if the employee is assessed aspresenting a serious risk of violence.

THE QUESTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT INTERVENTION

While actual criminal violations should be reported to the appropriate law enforcementagency, the Threat Management Team should carefully consider the potential risks andbenefits of requesting law enforcement intervention in a situation that does not rise tothe level of a criminal act. The Threat Management Team, in advance of any particularincident, would benefit from developing an understanding regarding the ability of itslocal law enforcement agency to appropriately intervene during incident management,and the nature and limits of its prospective role during incident management. Ofcourse, as emphasized throughout this guideline, the question of law enforcementintervention should be considered within the context of a Threat Management Team’soverall incident management strategies.




17.0. CONCLUSION

As this guideline shows, the issue of workplace violence is far broader than the highlypublicized but rare instances of disturbed employees engaging in shooting sprees that killand wound multiple victims. Only a very few organizations will ever experience episodes ofthat kind, but a far greater number will face other forms of workplace violence: threateningacts and violent events that are less spectacular and less deadly but still significantlydamage the well-being of an organization and place employees in harm’s way. Noorganization, large or small, public or private, for-profit or in the nonprofit sector, canassume that it will be immune to the wide range of disturbing, threatening, and violentconduct that falls within the rubric of workplace violence. All ultimately carry aresponsibility, both for humanitarian and legal reasons, to protect employees and otherswho interact with the workplace to the fullest practical extent by taking measures to helpdetect threats at the earliest possible moment, prevent violence, and mitigate theconsequences when violence occurs.

Education and awareness about workplace violence—its nature and scope, an employer’sobligation to address this complex problem, and the practical steps that can be taken toensure adequate prevention and management—lie at the heart of successful workplaceviolence prevention and response efforts. An integrated, multidisciplinary approach alsoforms a key to a successful workplace violence program. No one sector of an organizationcan successfully act alone to prevent violence, and no one profession or disciplinepossesses the skills or capabilities needed to design, implement, and administer asuccessful workplace violence program. A successful workplace violence program begins atthe top, with a firm commitment from executive management to a safe and respectfulworkplace. Responsibility for a workplace violence prevention and response program thenfalls on an interdisciplinary array of professionals within an organization who can bringskills to bear on this complex problem. Together, different constituents within anorganization, assisted by outside experts as necessary, can work to develop and implementa prevention and response program that brings structure, predictability, and consistency tothe handling of the wide range of behaviors and circumstances that can jeopardizeworkplace safety.

The benefits to adopting a proactive and reasoned approach to workplace violence aremany. Disturbing, threatening, and violent behavior affects more than just the person orpersons directly threatened or harmed. Beyond questions of legal liability and othertangible financial costs, which can be staggering, organizations that lack effective means ofdetecting, managing, and preventing workplace violence will meet up with morefundamental costs in the form of disrupted productivity, low employee morale, and apublic image that communicates a disregard for employee safety. Alternatively, anorganization that handles the broad range of workplace violence well not only can avoidcostly incidents, but will also benefit from feelings of confidence, security, and safety thatcharacterize a successful organization.

Ultimately, workplace violence, in its many forms, presents one of the most challengingproblems that an organization can face. It has been the intent of this guideline to provideinformation and practical steps that will enable any organization to develop an effectiveand informed approach to this important workplace issue.




18.0. REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY

GENERAL: INCIDENCE AND PREVENTION

Anderson, K.R., Tyler, M.P., Jenkins, E.L., (2004). Preventing workplace violence. Journal ofEmployee Assistance, 34(4), 8-11.

ASIS International. (2005). Business continuity guideline: A practical approach foremergency preparedness, crisis management, and disaster recovery. Alexandria, VA: ASISInternational. http://www.asisonline.org/guidelines/guidelines.htm

ASIS International. (2003). General security risk assessment guideline. Alexandria, VA: ASISInternational. http://www.asisonline.org/guidelines/guidelines.htm

Calhoun, F.S., (1998). Hunters and howlers: Threats and violence against federal judicialofficials in the United States, 1789-1993 (SuDoc J 25.2: H 91). Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. ofJustice, U.S. Marshall’s Service.

Elliott, J.F. (Ed.). (2003). Workplace violence prevention: A practical guide (2 vols).Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Specialty Technical Publishers.

Engel, F. (2004). Taming the beast: Getting violence out of the workplace (2nd ed.). Montreal,Quebec, Canada: Ashwell Publishers.

Gill, M., Fisher, B., Bowie, V. (Eds.). (2002). Violence at work: Causes, patterns, andprevention. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (1996). Combating workplace violence:Guidelines for employers and law enforcement (prepared by the Defense PersonnelResearch Center PERSEREC). Alexandria, VA: International Association of Chiefs of Police.

International Labour Organization. (2003). Code of practice on workplace violence inservices sectors and measures to combat this phenomenon. Geneva, Switzerland:International Labour Organization.

Jenkins, E. L. (1996). Violence in the workplace: Risk factors and prevention strategies(DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 96-100). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Labig, C.E., (1995). Preventing violence in the workplace. New York: American ManagementAssociation.

Lies, M.A. (1999, July/August). Disarming the threat of workplace violence. WorkplaceViolence Prevention Reporter, 5(7/8), 1, 6-7.

Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff, Tichy, Mathiason. (1996). Terror and violence in the workplace(chapter 26). In Littler Mendelson (Ed.). The National Employer 2002/03 edition. New York:LexisNexis.




Mantell, M. with Albrecht, S. (1994). Ticking bombs: Defusing violence in the workplace.Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin Professional Publishing.

Mattman, J., Kaufer, S. (Eds.). (1998). The complete workplace violence prevention manual(vols. 1-2). Costa Mesa, CA: James Publishing.

Millwee, S.C., (December 1999). How can security get inside the door? Security Management,43(12), 118, 116-117. http://www.securitymanagement.com/

Office of Personnel Management. (1998). Dealing with workplace violence: A guide foragency planners (OWR-09). Washington, DC: Office of Personnel Management.http://www.opm.gov/ehs/workplac/index.asp

Rosen, L.S. (2004). The safe hiring manual: The complete guide to keeping criminals,imposters and terrorists out of the workplace. Tempe, AZ: Facts on Demand Press.

Rugala, E.A., Isaacs, A.R. (2004). Workplace violence: Issues in response. FBI NationalCenter for the Analysis of Violent Crime, Critical Response Group. Quantico, VA: FBIAcademy. http://www.fbi.gov/publications/violence.pdf

Runyan, C., Zakocs, R., Zwerling, C. (2000). Administrative and behavioral interventions forworkplace violence prevention. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 18(4), 116-127.

Southerland, M. D., Collins, P.A., Scarborough, K.E. (1997). Workplace violence: Acontinuum from threat to death. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Company.

Speer, R. (1998). Workplace violence: A preparedness guide for Santa Clara Countyemployers. San Francisco: Speer Associates. www.workplacelaw.com

The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. (2000). Report of the United Statespostal service commission on a safe and secure workplace. New York: Columbia University,The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse.

VandenBos, G., Bulatao, E. (Eds.). (1996). Violence on the job: Identifying risks anddeveloping solutions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Wilkinson, C.W. (1998). Violence in the workplace: Preventing, assessing, and managingthreats at work. Rockville, MD: Government Institutes.

BEHAVIORAL CONTRIBUTORS; BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT

Aquino, K., Bies, R., Tripp, T. (2001). How employees respond to personal offense: The effectsof blame attribution, victim status, and offender status on revenge and reconciliation in theworkplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 52-59.

Baron, R., Newman, J., Geddes, D. (1999). Social and personal determinants of workplaceaggression: Evidence for the impact of perceived injustice and the type A behavior pattern.Aggressive Behavior, 25, 281-296.




Baron, R., Neuman, J. (1996). Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidence ontheir relative frequency and potential causes. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 161-173.

Buckley, P., Noffsinger, S., Smith, D., Hrouda, D., Knoll, J. (2003). Treatment of the psychoticpatient who is violent. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 26, 231-272.

Cole, L., Grubb, P., Sauter, S., Swanson, N., Lawless, P. (1997). Psychosocial correlates ofharassment, threats and fear of violence in the workplace. Scandinavian Journal of Work andEnvironmental Health, 23, 450-457.

Davenport, N., Schwartz, R.D., Elliott, G.P. (1999). Mobbing: Emotional abuse in theAmerican workplace. Ames, Iowa: Civil Society Publishing.

Deneberg, R.V., Braverman, M. (1999). The violence-prone workplace: A new approach todealing with hostile, threatening and uncivil behavior. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Douglas, S., Martinko, M. (2001). Exploring the role of individual differences in theprediction of workplace aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 547-559.

Glomb, T. (2002). Workplace anger and aggression: Informing conceptual models with datafrom specific encounters. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7(1), 20-36.

Kennedy, D., Homant, R., Homant, M. (2004). Perceptions of injustice as a determinant ofsupport for workplace aggression. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18, 323-336.

Lies, M.A. (2004). Get out of my face! Dealing with the hostile employee. Tower TimesMagazine, 10(5), 42-44.

Lucero, M., Middleton, K., Finch, W., Valentine, S. (2003). An empirical investigation ofsexual harassers: Toward a perpetrator typology. Human Relations, 56(12), 1461-1483.

Namie, G. and Namie, R. (2000). The bully at work: What you can do to stop the hurt andreclaim your dignity on the job. Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, Inc.

Neuman, J. H., Baron, R. A. (1998). Three factor model of workplace aggression [Table 1:Expressions of hostility, obstructionism aggression ranked in order of frequency]. Journal ofManagement, 24(3).

Neuman, J., Baron, R. (1998). Workplace violence and workplace aggression: Evidenceconcerning specific forms, potential causes, and preferred targets. Journal of Management,24(3), 391-419.

Salin, D. (2003). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivatingand precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations,56(10), 1213-1232.

Sandberg, D., McNiel, D., Binder, R. (2002). Stalking, threatening, and harassing behavior bypsychiatric patients toward clinicians. Journal of American Academic Psychiatry Law, 30,221-9.




Warren, J., Brown, D., Hurt, S., Cook, S., Branson, W., Jin, R. (1999). The organizationalcontext of non-lethal workplace violence: Its interpersonal, temporal and spatial correlates.Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 41(7), 567-581.

CRISIS MANAGEMENT

Blythe, B. (2002). Blindsided: A manager’s guide to catastrophic incidents in the workplace.New York: Penguin.

Schouten, R., Callahan, M.V., Bryant, S. (2004). Community response to disaster: the role ofthe workplace. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 12(4), 229-237.

White, S.G., Hatcher, C. (1988). Violence and trauma response. Occupational Medicine: Stateof the Art Reviews, 3(4), 677-694.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

ABA Commission on Domestic Violence. (2004). The impact of domestic violence on yourlegal practice: A lawyer’s handbook (2nd Ed.). Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.

American Prosecutors Research Institute. (1997). Domestic violence: Prosecutors take thelead. Alexandria, VA: American Prosecutors Research Institute.

Barnett, O.W., (2001). Why battered women do not leave (Part 2, External Inhibiting Factors– Social Support and Internal Inhibiting Factors). Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 2(1), 3-35.

Bondi, M.A. (Ed.). (2002). Domestic violence and the workplace. Washington, DC:Partnership for Prevention.http://www.prevent.org/publications/Domestic Violence and the Workplace.pdf

Cavanaugh, K. (2003). Understanding women’s responses to domestic violence. QualitativeSocial Work, 2(3), 229-249.

Dutton, D. G. (1995). The domestic assault of women: Psychological and criminal justiceperspectives. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: UBC Press.

Dutton, D. G. (1998). The abusive personality: violence and control in intimaterelationships. New York: Guilford.

Legal Momentum Organization. (2002). Impact of violence in the lives of working women:Creating solutions-creating change. New York: Legal Momentum Organization.www.legalmomentum.org/pub/pubs/CreatingSolutions.pdf.

Mears, D.P. (2003). Research and interventions to reduce domestic violence revictimization.Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 4(2), 127-427.




National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2003). Costs of intimate partnerviolence against women in the United States. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control andPrevention. http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/ipv cost/ipv.htm

Office of Personnel Management. (n.d.). Responding to domestic violence—Where federalemployees can find help. Retrieved May 2005, from http://www.opm.gov/ehs/workplac/html/domestic.asp

Paziotopoulos, P., (2002) Domestic violence in the workplace. In Workplace ViolencePrevention: A Practical Guide pp. 1-39. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: SpecialtyTechnical Publishers.

Randel, J.A., Wells, K.K. (2003). Corporate approaches to reducing intimate partner violencethrough workplace initiatives. Clinics in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 3, 821-841.

Speer, R. (1998). Workplace violence: A preparedness guide for Santa Clara Countyemployers. San Francisco: Speer Associates. www.workplacelaw.com

Thompson, R.H. (n.d.). Domestic violence and the workplace: 10 smart ‘‘nuts and bolts’’steps for employers. Retrieved May 2005, from http://www.abanet.org/domviol/workviolence.html

GUN VIOLENCE

Lies, M.A. (2004, Fall). Guns at the workplace: Liability challenges. Employment PracticesLiability Consultant, 3, 15-17.

Siebel, B.J. (Ed.). (1997). Guns and business don’t mix: A guide to keeping your businessgun-free. Washington, DC: The Center to Prevent Handgun Violence. http://www.gunlawsuits.org/defend/business.php

LAW ENFORCEMENT; COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

Panniello, J. (Ed.). (2004). Workplace violence: Wakefield responds. Boston, MA:Northeastern University, Center for Criminal Justice Policy Research.

LEGAL ISSUES

Speer, R. (2003). Workplace violence: A legal perspective. Clinics in Occupational andEnvironmental Medicine, 3, 733-749.




RISK ASSESSMENT; THREAT ASSESSMENT

Borum, R., Fein, R., Vossekuil, B., Berglund, J. (1999). Threat assessment: Defining anapproach for evaluating risk of targeted violence. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17, 323-337. http://www.treas.gov/usss/ntac/ntac bsl99.pdf

Calhoun, F.S., Weston, S.W. (2003). Contemporary threat management: A practical guide foridentifying, assessing and managing individuals of violent intent. San Diego, CA: SpecializedTraining Services.

Campbell, J.C. (2001). Danger Assessment. Retrieved May 2005, from http://www.ncdsv.org/images/DANGERASSESSMENT.pdf

Corcoran, M.H. and Cawood, J.S. (2003). Violence assessment and intervention: Thepractitioner’s handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

DeBecker, G. (1997). The gift of fear: Survival signals that protect us from violence. NewYork: Random House.

Fein, R., Vossekuil, B. (1998). Protective intelligence and threat assessment investigations: Aguide for state and local law enforcement officials. Washington, DC: Justice InformationCenter, National Criminal Justice Reference Service. http://www.treas.gov/usss/ntac/ntac pi guide state.pdf

Fein, R., Vossekuil, B., Holden, G.A. (1995). Threat assessment: An approach to preventtargeted violence (NCJ 155000). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office ofJustice Programs, National Institute of Justice. http://www.treas.gov/usss/ntac/ntac threat.pdf

Meloy, J.R. (2000). Violence risk and threat assessment: A practical guide for mental healthand criminal justice professionals. San Diego, CA: Specialized Training Services.

Mohandie, K. & Meloy, J. R. (2000). Clinical and forensic indicators of ‘‘suicide by cop.’’Journal of Forensic Sciences, 45(2), 384-389.

Monahan, J., Steadman, H. J. (Eds.). (1994). Violence and mental disorder: Developments inrisk assessments. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 183-202.

Monahan, J., Steadman, H.J., Silver, P.S., et al. (2001). Rethinking risk assessment. NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Turner, J.T., and Gelles, M.G. (2003). Threat assessment: A risk management approach.Binghampton, NY: The Haworth Press.

White, S.G., Cawood, J.S. (1998). Threat management of stalking cases. In J.R. Meloy (Ed.).The Psychology of Stalking: Clinical and Forensic Perspectives, (pp 295-314).San Diego, CA: Academic Press.




SCHOOL VIOLENCE

Lies, M.A. (2004). Workplace violence: School liability. In J.C. Hanks (Ed.). School violence:From discipline to due process, chapter 6. Chicago, IL: ABA Publishing.

O’Toole, M.E. (1999). The school shooter: A threat assessment perspective. FBI CriticalIncident Response Group, National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime. Quantico, VA:FBI Academy.

Reddy, M., et al. (2001). Evaluating risk for targeted violence in schools: Comparing riskassessment, threat assessment, and other approaches. Psychology In the Schools, 38(2), 157-172.

Vossekuil, B., Reddy, M., Fein, R., Borum, R., Modzeleski, W. (2000). U.S.S.S. Safe schoolinitiative: An interim report on the prevention of targeted violence in schools. Washington,DC: U.S. Secret Service, National Threat Assessment Center. http://www.secretservice.gov/ntac/ntac ssi report.pdf

STATISTICS AND STUDIES

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2004). National census of fatal occupational injuries, 2003(USDL Pub. No. 04-1830). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of LaborStatistics.

Duhart, D. (2001). Violence in the workplace, 1993-1999 (NCJ 190076). Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Feldmann, T.B., Johnson, P.W. (1996). Workplace violence: A new form of lethal aggression.In H. Hall (Ed.), Lethal violence 2000: A sourcebook on fatal domestic, acquaintance andstranger aggression. Kammela, HA: Pacific Institute for the Study of Conflict andAggression.

Hartley, D., Biddle, E.A., Jenkins, E.L. (2005). Societal cost of workplace homicides in theUnited States, 1992-2001. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 47, 518-527.

Jockin, V., Avery, R., McGue, M. (2001). Perceived victimization moderates self-reports ofworkplace aggression and conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1262-1269.

Kowalenko, T., Walters, B., Khare, R., Compton, S. (in press). Workplace violence: A survey ofemergency physicians in the state of Michigan. Annals of Emergency Medicine.

Meloy, J.R., Hempel, A.G., Gray, B.T., Mohandie, K., Shiva, A., Richards, T.C. (2004). Acomparative analysis of North American adolescent and adult mass murderers. BehavioralSciences and the Law, 22, 291-309.

Nixon, W.B. (2004). The financial impact of workplace violence. Lake Forest, CA: NationalInstitute for the Prevention of Workplace Violence, Inc.




Office of Safety and Health Administration. (2002). Workplace violence (OSHA Fact Sheet).Washington, DC: OSHA Publications Office. http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data General Facts/factsheet-workplace-violence.pdf

Pinkerton Consulting and Investigations. (2003). Top security threats and managementissues facing corporate America (PCI 8473). Parsippany, NJ: Pinkerton Consulting andInvestigations.

Society for Human Resources Management. (2005). Workplace violence survey, 2004.Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resources Management. www.shrm.org.

Sullivan, J.M. (2004, Spring). Workplace Violence Survey & White Paper. RM/Insight, 3(3), 1,3-12.

Injury Prevention Research Center. (2001). Workplace violence: A report to the nation. IowaCity, IA: University of Iowa, Injury Prevention Research Center.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2004). Violence against women: Identifying risk factors (NIJResearch in Brief, NCJ 197019). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, NationalInstitute of Justice. www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/197019.pdf

STALKING

American Prosecutors Research Institute. (1997). Stalking: Prosecutors convict and restrict.Alexandria, VA: American Prosecutors Research Institute.

Knoll, J.L. (in press). Risk management of stalking. In Psychiatric Aspects of Stalking –Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry, Committee on Psychiatry & Law. New York:Oxford University Press.

Lion, J., Herschler, J. (1998). The stalking of clinicians by their patients. In J.R. Meloy (Ed.)The psychology of stalking: Clinical and forensic perspectives, (pp. 165-175). San Diego, CA:Academic Press, 1998

Maxey, W. (2002). The San Diego stalking strike force: A multi-disciplinary approach toassessing and managing stalking and threat cases. Journal of Threat Assessment, 2(1), 43-53.

Meloy, J. R. (Ed.) (1998). The psychology of stalking: Clinical and forensic perspectives. SanDiego, CA: Academic Press.

Meloy, J.R. (2002). Stalking and violence. In J. Boon & L. Sheridan. (Eds.). Stalking andpsychosexual obsession: Psychological perspectives for prevention, policing and treatment(pp.103-124). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mullen, P.E., Pathe, M., Purcell, R. (2000). Stalkers and their victims. Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.




Rugala, E.A., McNamara, J., Wattendorf, G. (2004). Expert Testimony and Risk Assessment inStalking Cases. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 73(11), 1-10.

GOVERNMENT WEBSITES

Bureau of Labor Statistics (offers research and statistics on workplace violence)http://www.bls.gov/home.htm

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (December 2001). Violence in the Workplace, 1993-99.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/vw99.pdf

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2004). Workplace violence: Issues in response. FBINational Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, Critical Response Group. Quantico, VA:FBI Academy. http://www.fbi.gov/publications/violence.pdf

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2002). Violence: Occupationalhazards in hospitals (DHHS (NIOSH) publication No. 2002-101). Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety andHealth. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/2002-101.html

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (1993). Alert: Preventing homicide inthe workplace (DHHS (NIOSH) publication No. 93-109). Washington, DC: U.S. Departmentof Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/pdfs/93-109sum.pdf

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2004). Violence on the Job (DHHS(NIOSH) DVD Publication No. 2004-100d). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/video/violence.html

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (no date). Reduce your risk forrobbery and robbery related injury (Poster). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/injury/pdfs/conv store poster.pdf

U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA. (Ed.). (2005, May 16-last update). Safety and HealthTopics: Workplace violence [Online]. Available: http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/workplaceviolence/index.html [2005, May 16].

Vossekuil, B., Reddy, M., Fein, R., Borum, R., Modzeleski, W. (2000). U.S.S.S. Safe schoolinitiative: An interim report on the prevention of targeted violence in schools. Washington,DC: U.S. Secret Service, National Threat Assessment Center.http://www.secretservice.gov/ntac/ntac ssi report.pdf




DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ORGANIZATIONS

American Institute on Domestic Violence http://www.aidv-usa.com/

Corporate Alliance to End Partner Violence http://www.caepv.org/

Domestic Violence in the Workplace http://www.ndvh.org/

Family Violence Prevention Fund http://endabuse.org/workplace/

Legal Momentum: Advancing Women’s Rights http://www.legalmomentum.org/

Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse (bibliography of workplace violence articles)http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/bibs/bibworkv/bibworkv.html

Office for Victims of Crime (offers several articles on workplace violence, includingdomestic violence) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/welcovc/welcome.html

National Center for Victims of Crime (offers several articles on workplace violence,including domestic violence) http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/Main.aspx



Documents

asis workplace violence guidelines book